By the way, before anyone rushes up to Market Harborough Town Hall to look up the electoral register - that was just a little joke.

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

Oh Bollocks!

I've just cleared my diary for tomorrow!!

According to JD, Alan B/Fulham/Hensman are all one and the same person, more importantly there are suggestions in the forum that there is at least one other name used by the same persona.
Now how are we meant to take evidence found by any such person seriously?.

quote:

Originally posted by BlackCat:
We are not part of the chosen few. JIB gave a good reason earlier why the full evidence wasn't being released earlier today:

"The reason that I don't reproduce VDW's real name and address as revealed by Fulham to me is the wish to not be responsable for throwing the real VDW to the lions.

As you know there are no shortage of odd characters who frequent VDW threads, and VDW has made it clear that he has no wish to comment on these matters. And, for whatever his sins, as he very much deserves my respect, I feel he could be exposed to needless bullying from people who could feel a grievance about his conduct".

Personally, I can fully understand and accept that argument. If you want more evidence, then it is up to Fulham whether it is supplied... or not!

Surely it isn't the person's name that is the real issue here?
The question is whether this guy is/was VDW or not, and that is what needs to be proven, not some guy in Leicestershire's name.

I have always found AlanB to be very helpful. Other people may have a different experience, but as the saying goes – "speak as you find". If he wants to call himself different things on different Message Boards, does it actually matter?

Up until recently, I have always used BlackCat. This was on the basis that when I joined my first forum, (RSUK), I had a cat, and it was... tortoiseshell!! Strangely, I felt "TortoiseshellCat" might be a bit of a mouthful, so I opted for BlackCat.

I now keep two terrific greyhounds. So when I joined the last forum (TRF) I signed up as Greyhound. Nothing sinister or secretive in it. In fact, IMP guessed immediately... the little imp.

Is Hensman AlanB/Fulham? Perhaps, perhaps not. Again, does it matter? Not to me.

If you have a problem with Fulham or the evidence or the witnesses, then I guess you'll have to pursue it in your own way.

I'm off to watch some TV now. See you later.

quote:

Originally posted by IMP:
Oh Bollocks!

I've just cleared my diary for tomorrow!!

I bet you've even filled your tank up and typed Market thingy into your TomTom too!

quote:

Surely it isn't the person's name that is the real issue here?
The question is whether this guy is/was VDW or not, and that is what needs to be proven, not some guy in Leicestershire's name.

Sorry JD, but the name has to be an issue, the person who would would have us believe that the whole VDW saga is an untruth from the start has to be registered.
Those who have followed should not be afraid to list their names accordingly as by all accounts the evidence is conclusive.

Walter

It is really primarily a question of what the late Richard Rorty termed warrant. Truth is one thing, warrant (what people believe) is another - a distinction which, for example, lies at the heart of most judicial systems.

Once evidence is assembled, the researcher forms conclusions, but by now has been close to the material for quite a while and maybe too close. Only by presenting that evidence to others can fresh perspectives be given, which may be confirmatory of the researcher's initial conclusions or may cast doubt upon them.

In the scientific world, initial consultations on evidence and conclusions are often followed by publication so that anyone can appraise the evidence and comment. But this is not the scientific world, dealing with the inanimate, or even the social science world, dealing with populations, samples etc.

This is about one elderly chap living at a specific address. Her Majesty's Customs and Revenue might not give a damn about losing the personal data of 25 million people, and other organisations, governmental and non governmental, might also be criminally careless in handling personal data. But others are not, and I think the decision of JIB and the others who have been given the opportunity to see the evidence is admirable.

Elitist? In one sense, of course. The researcher chose whom to consult, and his criteria, it may be assumed, were the value he attached to the judgement of those consulted and his assessment of their characters. But that is not to imply that others interested would have less worthy opinions or be any less honest and reflective individuals. It is merely a reflection of the individuals with whom the researcher happens to have had significant contact and about whom he has formed views.

Walter

In true VDW superiour style
Never expect a straight forward answer to a straight forward question.

It wouldnt be VDW without something for you to work out for yourself

quote:

Elitist? In one sense, of course. The researcher chose whom to consult, and his criteria, it may be assumed, were the value he attached to the judgement of those consulted and his assessment of their characters. But that is not to imply that others interested would have less worthy opinions or be any less honest and reflective individuals. It is merely a reflection of the individuals with whom the researcher happens to have had significant contact and about whom he has formed views.

Why do you people distance yourselves from us when it suits you to do so, then decide to take us into your confidence?.
It`s not for our benefit surely?.

Walter

It was JIB who decided "to take us into your confidence" and he has stated his reason clearly. You may wish he hadn't made that first post on this thread, but BC for instance seems glad he did.

It`s not for our benefit surely?.

Walter,

If it wasn't to benifit you and anyone else interested in VDW why do you think JIB bothered to let you know? For me the only difference is now you can be sure that somethings that have been written in the VDW literature CAN'T be taken at face value. Now that may be a surprise to you but I have had my doubts about certain aspects of the literature, and some of the people connected with it for some time.

Does the fact VDW fact doesn't live up to some of the "hype" alter the fact it is STILL the most useful book(s) on race analysis you will ever come across? Does it matter if VDW was or wasn't a rich Dutch business man, it may to you and others but not to me. Sure someone embroided VDW's social standing and possibly his punting ability. Mr Peach has admited he paid VDW to write some of the articles so for me some of it always had to be taken with a pinch of salt. That is why I always tried to work with the early examples and Systematic Betting.

As far as I can make out Fulham set out to write a book celebrating 30 years of VDW. During his research he discovered VDW may still be alive. He then tried to contact VDW with the idea of VDW writing a foreward and possibly confirming (or otherwise) Fulham had a true handle on the methods. Further research found the inconsistencies in the VDW story. I have seen the "evidence" and agree the inconsistences have been proven, and that's as far as it goes. Fulham did the work and he doesn't think the name should be made public knowledge thats good enough for me. Until Fulham decides HE wants to name names I will respect his wishes, and VDW's privacy.

Personally I think Fulham should be thanked for putting in the hard work, along with JIB for breaking the news. Have to say I was still thinking about how/if to do it. I also think Mr Peach should be asked why he didn't do the/some checking? I'm waiting until after Christmas and then I will be asking him.

Be Lucky

MTOTO
Do you know if Fulham ever got a response from VDW The last i read on the subject, i think Fulham said that he was going to write VDW a second letter because there was no response to the fist letter Fulham had sent.I do believe that Fulham said he may even try to contact a relative of VDW's. It would be nice to see the evidence to satisfy myself.

Thank you
Paul

Interesting - reading the posts on Black Cats link to the RSUK thread.

Fulham/AlanB etc - cites as one of his reasons for leaving the Gummy Forum as being - the anti VDW posts of a phegmatic Japanese contributor in the form of "Epigotis" !!

From day one - "Epi" , contended that "VDW" was an "aftertiming" - "backfiting" - "impersonator", and that he never existed in real life.

Perhaps "Epi" has now been vindicated !!

Thanks to a Guy with "real perception" and hopes that "alternative remedies" may lead, to enjoyment of "life"

cheers "epi"

tc

HELLO

Mr VDWXYZ originally wrote into a pen and paper forum (How things have moved on).

Mr VDWXYZ is alleged to have put pen to paper on numerous letters informing the then and on and now of his superior insight into horse race investing (does that sit more comfortable?).

The one trait that runs through all his examples is that they were aftertimed. This seems to cause an awful lot of consternation amongst those who believe and those who doubt along with those who completely dismiss the alleged now known charlatan.

I am not entirely sure, but from my findings thus far he has made comment on around 100 examples from the first in 78 to sometime around 98. From these 100 (maybe more?) if we are to believe the word then he might only have had a punt on 20% of those races assessed (In the spell it all out article he evaluated how many but only punted two).

Looking at my records of some 85 examples covering a period of some 10 years the only racing certainty's consisted of six horses, one "fine wager", four "outstanding bets" and four "wagered". A total of 19 in ten +years that were cherry picked after the event.

Has anyone looked at races that were within the realms of Mr VDWXYZ and not mentioned, by which I mean those type of races we should/should not have been looking at.

Again I ask the question how one can put so much faith in someone who we are now led to believe was a daydreamer when the facts as allegedly discovered by others will remain with them and them alone.

I again repeat "A real shame that you did not just keep this to yourselves as you are exposed to what you are allegedly trying to protect VDW from, ridicule".

I am not personally bothered who he/she really is, my gripe is why mention it in the first place if you can not substantiate it, Who are Lee,OT,Fulham,Mtotto,they could be anyone for all I know.

Do these people make a living from punting horses, from my experience I doubt it very much, and I know I don't.

Why would anyone spend years on various forums discussing the merits of how great Mr VDWXYZ is if they have unlocked the door, its hard work alright but it is not the hard work you all earn your crust at?

I expect certain quotations now to suit the cherry picking.

I add that it all seems very strange to me.

THANK YOU

VINCENT

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

"I am not personally bothered who he/she really is, my gripe is why mention it in the first place if you can not substantiate it, Who are Lee,OT,Fulham,Mtotto,they could be anyone for all I know."

Vincent,

Your complaint is disingenious. If you aren't really bothered about VDW's true identity why are you bothered by people discussing the matter without first taking the trouble to convince you they are correct?

I gave this thread a title that I thought would help us digest this unhoped for turn of events.

Without humility in the face of having been part, unwittingly or less so, of a 30 year deception no one is going to reach a fair minded evaluation of the situation.

If your initial reaction is one of trying to apportion blame to whomsoever you find most convenient in clearing your own responsability you do no more than demonstrate the reason behind your original error.

I would have thought it is self evident that those who are most distraught by this news are obviously the ones who have had least success with it. Obviously they do not have the comfort of knowing that they have at least gained something from the affair.

The greatest despair comes when there is no more hope.

BC,

Maria would like to send you a message.

HELLO

I am not blaming anyone. I may have a gripe, but expertly cherry picked.

THANK YOU

VINCENT

JIB

I think you are missing, conveniently or otherwise, the point of Vincent's post.

"I am not personally bothered who he/she really is, my gripe is why mention it in the first place if you can not substantiate it, Who are Lee,OT,Fulham,Mtotto,they could be anyone for all I know."

Vincent, like many of us, is presented with a proposal accusing VDW of being a fraud and, like many of us, he has yet to see any evidence.
In case you have forgotten, or again, conveniently ignored, this proposal is forwarded by a person who himself does the very thing he accuses VDW of; namely writes to a racing forum pretending to be two different people, yet you expect us to accept his word, or that of his known acolytes, without question?
Like Vincent, and almost everyone else outside your little enclave, I remain unconvinced of the veracity of this proposal, or the motives behind those that are party to it discussing it on this board.

Morning,

I am struggling to work out who are the biggest dickheads here

1)The posters for starting the debacle, 2)the idiots for believing it or 3)me for rejoining to read it . (ted rogers will not struggle)

I must say to Gummy however, this is surely the biggest comeback since Lazarus and not the re-opening of the web-site as he has claimed on the front page.