From Fulham - thanks !


1978 Erin

To help those without the old Form Books, a member of the now defunct VDW Methodology Group posted some details of the early VDW examples on that Group's board.

He has agreed that I may copy some on to this thread, and below is the data he posted about the 1978 Erin (Prominent King's race). I believe this is the data Marchwood copied, and hope it comes out in a reasonably clear format:

The race was a class 90 non-handicap, run over 2m at Leopardstown on yielding ground on 18 February 1978.

Last 3 Runs Horse Weight Cons

0 1 0 P MASTER MONDAY 8-12-0 21
3 1 3L DECENT FELLOW 5-11-11 7(14)
1 1 0 MELADON 5-11-11 12
1 1 2 BEACON LIGHT 7-11-8 4*
3 3 6 MONKSFIELD 6-11-8 12
- 8 9 0 BALLYMOUNTAIN GIRL 9-11-4 27
4 1 1 BANSWARA 6-11-4 6
5 1 0 - COOCH BEHAR 6-11-4 16
3 1 2 DRUMGORA 6-11-4 6
1 5 – 0 MULTIPLE 8-11-4 16
4 – 2 2 PROMINENT KING 6-11-4 8*
1 5 7L TROYSWOOD 6-11-4 16
1 1 MR KILDARE 5-11-1 3*
1 3 F 5 SILVINE 5-11-1 9
1 1 2 BEPARAEJOJO 4-10-0 4
3 2 2 BUGLE BEADS 4-10-0 7

Actual Betting Evs B.Light,5 D.Fellow,
Mr.Kildare,6 P.King,
10 Meladon,11 Monksfield,20 Bar
Fcst given by VDW B Light,D Fellow,M Kildare,P
King and Monksfield


MR. KILDARE

28/1 1st 14 8 10-10 2m NAAS Sft Cond Hd 8/11f 11-0 3/1
27/12 1st 6 2.5 10-9 2m LEOP Yld Mdn Hd 2/5f 10-9 10/1



BEACON LIGHT

4/2 2nd 39 1 12-2 2m SAND Hvy CondHd 6/4f 11-12 2/1
2/1 1st 43 2 12-1 2m WIND Gd CondHd 4/5f 11-9 7/2
26/12 1st 85 2 11-102m KEMP Yld CondHd 5/2 11-7 6/4f

DRUMGORA (for ref)

28/1 2nd 17 1.5 10-9 2m3fNAAS Sft HcpHd 9/4f 9-7 5/2
14/1 1st 6 5 11-2 2m LEOP Gd HcpHd 6/4f 12-7 9/4
27/12 3rd116 2.5 10-1 2mLEOP Yld HcpHd 33/1 11-4 4/1f



PROMINENT KING

14/1 2nd 6 5 12-7 2m LEOP Gd HcpHd 9/4 11-2 6/4f
31/12 2nd 14 4 11-4 2m4fPUNCHSftCondHd 8/1 11-4 12/1
17/2 4th 88 11 11-11 2m LEOP HvyCondHd 10/1 12-0 20/1



DECENT FELLOW

28/1 3rdL 22 25 11-12 2mDONSftCondHd 9/4 11-12 13/8jf
27/12 1st 116 1.5 11-4 2mLEOPYld HcpHd 4/1f 10-4 14/1
17/12 3rd 28 12 11-8 2m ASCGd CondHd 4/7f 11-8 13/2


Result

Prominent King WON 6/1

Fulham - 27/1/03

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fulham

thanks again. -

re Guests publications . - I would love to look at them , but with almost 400 pages to wade thro` this is no small task !

A new thread , or even "publication" which detailed "Additional" information to the VDW articles ( with all controversial comment Deleted ) would help some of us "NEWCOMERS" come to terms with the writings -

Any volunteers ? - Simple Cut and Past from your existing info is all that is needed !

"Example post Above"

Great idea. Well done.

Tupenny

A useful start, but it probably needs the text from the original VDW letter that mentioned this race. It would put the race in the context.

Rob

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.
C Van der Wheil, Market Harborough.
Letter 12 From "Methodmaker" Sports Forum`s Systems Anayst
Betting Forecasts Narrow The Field
IN a recent contribution to Sports Forum, reader C. Van der Wheil put up a
proposition which he claimed would narrow the field and at the same time put the odds
in favour of the backer. He also said that the first six in the betting forecast produce a
high percentage of winners, 'and if we add the last three placings of the respective
horses in the forecast together we have a numerical picture.'
I certainly agree with this contributor's contention that the first five or six horses in
the betting forecast, between them, produce a high percentage of winners. Indeed, I
have proof that:
1 - First and second quotations return some 50 per cent winners.
f*
2 - Third, fourth and fifth quotations 33 per cent winners. ﾈ';･
3 - All other quotations 17 per cent winners.
The above percentages covered a wide area of different forecasts and can be taken as
the result of an acceptable survey.
What I am not so sure about is the way C. Van der Wheil so readily accepts previous
form figures at their face value. He appears to do this without question and in this
context he may be skating on very thin ice.
On occasions, the winner apart, such placings can be virtually meaningless.
Logically, to assess their true value all minor placings should be the subject of close
scrutiny. I am sure that 'C. Van der W with his undoubted know-how will appreciate
the point.
As regards the introduction of our friend's approach of betting forecast quotations, it
is good to see that nowadays different newspapers tend to present much the same
anticipatory odds. This greater unanimity serves a good purpose in the sense that it
stabilises the position for the many keen users of betting forecasts.
Of course, forecast quotations can never be more than a guide as to how the betting
on the course may go. Inevitably, actual SP returns will tend to differ, but by and largcf'
betting forecasts will continue to serve as potentially sound sources of information.
Letter 13
Numbers Game To Form A Picture.
METHODMAKER comments on my contribution with the suggestion that I appear
to accept previous form figures without question and in this context may be skating on
very thin ice. 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.' Presumably if someone ofMethodmaker's calibre has
misinterpreted my suggestion there will be many readers who have failed to grasp the
intent.
I stated that consistent horses win a high percentage of races and now present a few
form-figures from my own extensive surveys. Disregarding ALL factors other than the
last three placings, my figures show percentage wins next time:
111 33%, 121 32%, 221 31%, 321 29%, 132 26%, 313 24%, 213 25%, 214 24%, 204
8%, 302 8%, 404 5%, 000 2%.
Using Methodmaker's figures, which I accept, the first five produce 83% winners.
My own combined figures from the three most consistent produce - 3-3-3 99%, 3-3-4
98%, 3-4-5 96%, 4-4-4 95%, 4-5-6 90%, 5-6-12 73%, 16-18-30 17%.
I also stated in
my contribution that all relevant horses were rated by two different methods.
April 21 at Sandown, the day following Methodmaker's comments, there was on
|outstanding bet by my calculations, Celtic Pleasure won 7/2. It is interesting that on the
^ame card Little Nugget scored and I leave it to readers to ponder without further
comment other than to say it did not feature in the first six in my paper, in fact it was
not mentioned. The following day Saturday, April 22, produced two more good things
(by my calculations) Battlement won 9/2 at Thirsk, and Strombolus won 7/1 in the
Whitbread Gold Cup at Sandown.
Again it is interesting that Strombolus did not feature in the first six in my daily, or in
a well known sporting daily. To the credit of the Sporting Chronicle it did feature. A
further point I feel worthy of mention is that both first and second in this race had a
total of three from last three placings. The previous Saturday, April 15 produced
three outstanding bets, again by my calculations. Rifle Brigade won 5/2 (Beverley),
Orchestra won 6/1, Derrylin won 4/1 (Newbury). In the latter's race note Weth Nan
second, and in Orchestra's race Welsh Dancer second. Readers may also like to ponder
over the Scottish National on the same day.
Since the opening of the Flat I have placed 32 bets of which 29 won. No wonder I
smile when a self-appointed 'old 'un' of 50 years' experience topples himself from
his pedestal by stating he finds it even more difficult to show a profit now tax has
been increased to 9%. I accept Methodmaker's comments and concede the ice breaks
sometimes, but assure him that on the whole it is much thicker than it may appear.
C.Van der Wheil, Leicestershire.
Letter No 30
There appears to be a large number of readers interested in the methods I have
outlined over the past months. Although I have tried to present them in simple terms a
high proportion of readers seem unable to grasp the intent.
L. J. Peverell, September 13, appears to have completely misunderstood my last
letter in which I used a 16-runner selling handicap, not in the way he suggests, but
merely to illustrate the mechanics of the method. There is no way to achieve 100%
winners in horse racing, but there are numerous methods to search out the favourable
areas.
Initially, I submitted a method based on two factors with which individuals may or
may not agree. First, consistent horses win a high percentage of races and second, the
first five or six in the betting forecast contain a high percentage of winners.
These two factors combined, narrow the field down to an area of prospective
^'winners, but they are not the only ones. It is good to see some readers have pushed the
idea around and devised other ways of using it.
Ever Optimistic has selected 10 form combinations and he may care to know the
percentage wins next time out from these to compare with prices in order to assist him
in establishing the viability of the idea. Previous three Form figures 111 produce 33%,
112 26%, 113 26%, 114 24%, 121 32%, 131 28%, 141 27%, 211 27%, 311 32% and
41127%.
Ever Optimistic has also observed trends in particular types of races and here readers
may deduce why I prefer better-class events.
Returning to consistent horses, readers may care to add together the last three
placings of each horse in every race down the card and review the findings, considering
type of race, etc. They may also care to do the same with the position in the betting
forecast of each winner.
29
In my last letter (August 23, 1979), I outlined a method that can be employed in
conjunction with these two factors which in themselves do not by any means cover
all desirable aspects. The combination of both methods does provide an area worth
investigation.
Methodmaker has produced figures which show the first five in the betting forecast in
all races produce 83% winners and readers who have taken the trouble to investigate
the position regarding the most consistent horses in the whole field, will note what an
interesting factor it is. Handicaps are said to be the graveyard of punters, but I see them
as happy hunting grounds.
A great deal of emphasis appears to be placed on my methods of rating, but there is
no mystery about them. I have said, because so much importance seems to be placed on,
them, that ratings are not the 'be-all and end-all' but should be used as a guide,

If you compare two private handicaps for instance, they can differ to an alarming
degree. Without going into the reasons for this, I do not wish to imply that ratings have
no value, but I do subscribe to the view that they must be coupled with other aspects to
have a worthwhile meaning.
Those who provide ratings do a valuable service, but I believe none of them would
disagree that they are compilers. This is in no way derogatory, because their figures are
the result of compiling various data and I believe they themselves know how to use
them to advantage.
Test any set of ratings yourself and you will find a certain percentage top-rated
winners and indeed, it is wise not to stray from the top five or six when selecting
wagers.
Because there is this variation between ratings I prefer to use two sets which
are compiled on different lines. This enables me to judge the reliability of the figures in
conjunction with the other factors. My letter of Aug 23 deliberately illustrates this
point.
It does not have to be top-rated to be a sound wager, the combination of all factors
and study of form does this. Study of the form and ratings can show a consistent horse
to be out of its depths,
as for instance Billbroker in the St Leger and equally Son ofﾈ
Love was a good thing in the same race.
Readers who rely on ratings may deduce that by taking the top five or six rated and
coupling with the five or six most consistent horses in the field they will trap a lot of
winners. Try it and you will find it interesting. In non-handicaps may I suggest sticking
to the top four rated.
I believe no useful purpose is served by readers subjecting other contributors to
abuse, in fact it ultimately results in depriving interested parties from receiving ideas.
Racing is unique in that there are so many ways of approaching the complexities
involved and Forum is, and will be, only as good as you, the readers, make it.
C.Van der Wheil, Market Harborough.

Well done ,Epi

VDW spells it out (extracts)


Hi all,
This is principally an answer to Epiglotis who requested the extract concerning Little Owl and Sunset Cristo.
Previous Horse Ability Cons. Ratings
Form
11F/111 Little Owl 36* 3* 69 90
1/21211 Wayward Lad 23* 4* 52 64
22/1324 Fairy King 10 9* 53 75
111UL Mr Kidd 13* 12 34 59
Betting Forecast: Evens W.Lad 5/4 L.Owl 14 F.King 20 Mr.Kidd.
At this stage do not make any automatic assumptions. The required data has been put together and it is now necessary to establish if any of the three probables have good claims for support. Always start appraisals by looking at the horse with the highest ability ratingand check how it balances with the other data.
In this race everything is straightforward, Little Owl has the highest ability rating and there is nothing in the other elements to suggest any upset, indeed all evidence shows it ought to be a good thing. 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.
This race clearly shows that Little Owl is a racing certainty and when the true odds are calculated a better price than 3/1 on would represent value. Wayward Lad is obviously a false forecast favourite and if it were to remain so on course, the chance of a very fine bet would be there. Little Owl won 4/5.
Form Horse Ability Cons. Ratings
31111P Tragus 24* 3* 57 85
L11/P/42 King Or Country 19* 7* 52 82
231111 Sunset Cristo 24* 3* 61 90
218U23 The Vintner 23* - 53 84
133/4U6 Fair View 25* 13 51 80
41L21F Bobjob 12 13 53 84
211F21 Bregawn 18 - 51 83
513512 The Engineer 13 8* 54 86
F/cast: 7/2 K. or C. 9/2 Tragus 11/2 Bobjob 6 S. Cristo 7 The Engineer Fair View, 14 The Vintner
Fair View with the highest ability rating is not at present consistent and the other data does not give any boost. Tragus made a mess of things and weakened 12th in last race and was then pulled up before the 14th which all tells its own story.
Sunset Cristo a close joint second on ability, super consistent and other data lends support. The form is impressive and note not only how it ran but what it had behind it. Te Engineer does not have the ability to gain upper hand on the run-in if it got into the hunt in the closing stages and King Or Country does not have anything going for it.
Another case of a false forecast favourite so Sunset Cristo should be a good bet.
Sunset Cristo won 5/1
Form Horse Ability Cons. Ratings
2/11 Easy Fella 11 4* 60 70
327122 Ellen Mavoureen 15* (5) 64 89
121124 Fauloon 18* 7* 52 72
15311 Fort Belvedere 13* 5* 68 87
111110 Gaye Chance 16* 12?3*? 76 90
111000 Run With Pride 12 30 30 80
375545 Alltyre 0 - 50 70
23803F Brandy Bird 0 - 38 57
1123 Castletown Lad 8 - 41 78
2*04235 Go Gently 0 - 43 76
411122 Gowanloch 7 5* 60 83
045255 Melerek 0 - 38 63
415491 Tieball 5 - 43 79
58/932 400 Nocte 0 - 40 63
1313 Acarine 9 7* 68 94
F/Cast: 3 Easy F. 7/2 Fauloon 6 Run W. P. 8 Gaye C. 1 Acarine, Fort B. Gowanloch 12 Castle'Lad 14 Ellen M. 25 Bar.
The alarm bells shpuld start ringing as soon as you look at this race. Fauloon with the highest ability has conflict with other ratings and form not exciting. Gaye Chance 2nd highest ability gets rating support and form shows it was out of its depth in previous race, otherwise support consistent and form impressive.
Ellen Mavoureen gets support from other ratings, is consistent, but not in much class, one paced and fails to be noted in the forecast area.
Fort Belvedere also receives support from other ratings but has not been running against much class although giving a good account. Other horses with consistent form do not have the ability to cause upset.
With experience it is not difficult to sort out the eventual winner but this race is a good example of conflict and should be left alone. No element of a gamble should be allowed to creep in. Note once again there is a false forecast favourite.
Gaye Chance won 11/1
Form Horse Ability Cons. Ratings
3/23231 Kenlis 11* 6* 65 88
2F1P11 Master Brutus 10* 3* 41 80
133653/ Brown Barman 9* too long off
123784 Magic Tipp 8 19 42 86
222133 Greenways 12* 7* 60 85
L413L2 Turk 9* 15 41 83
5L/3443 Silberto 9* 11 39 72
5U4248 Game Laddie 11* - 40 79
LL85/66 Dalket 10* - 35 61
F/Cast: 2 Kenlis 9/4 M. Brutus 4 Magic Tipp 6 Turk 13/2 Greenways 12 Silberto 16 Brown Barman 25 Bar.
he same procedure shows Kenlis to be a good thing, but note how the relative ability of the whole field is like a blanket, also note the penultimate race of Turk, last of seven, made no show and beaten out of sight. Calculate the performance as 10 when totting up previous form figures. So far this is the only genuine forecast favourite.
Kenlis won 11/4
The spade work is all complete and it can be seen there is a possible winner for each race, but once again the odds must be weighed. Providing a decent price can be obtained Little Owl will be taken because it is a racing certainty.
Sunset Cristo will also be taken as it is almost a certainty, but the rest will be left alone. Why? go back to the beginningand you will find it all tied up with temperament and odds.

Article that Fulham claims says it all.

APRIL 2, 1983:
Rectify old habits and make a fresh start says Van der Wheil
Those who say politics and religion cause more arguments than anything else must belong to the small percentage of households that do not have at least one member with an interest in horse racing. The sport has more than a fair share of controversial aspects and for newcomers it must present an awesome spectre, so there is little wonder few know where to start. The best place is always the beginning, but that also is subject to controversy.
Judging by some readers' letters it is evident to me that the same old dogmas prevail with a fair percentage of racing addicts. I use the word addicts deliberately, for it is obvious that a great many fail at the start because they neglect the first essential, that of acquiring temperament. It is futile to push the issue aside and think it does not apply to you. All you will achieve is an addiction to gamble and the widespread prevalence of this is shown by the necessity for an organisation such as Gamblers Anonymous.
New Year is the time for making resolutions and racing enthusiasts are fortunate in that they have two opportunities to rectify old stupid habits and make a fresh start.
During the past few years I have illustrated a method of selection that has been successful for decades and it is based on elements which should ensure future years will be the same. Many have found fault with my suggestions and this is as I would expect. If everyone thought the same there could not be a market which would be a
pity.
Some readers have come to terms with the method and can look forward to profitable years ahead, providing they never lose sight of that first essential. Using the method as intended when all elements come into balance is a force to be respected and those who. select just parts, or fail to understand the concept as a whole, will not succeed. It is all too easy to go astray and start blaming the method when all the time the fault lies with yourself.
STAKING
Another issue that causes argument is staking. Some are emphatic that only level stakes are valid and expound theories which purport to show the folly of any other procedure. I wonder if they consider business ventures succeed on level stakes?
Development costs can run into hundreds of millions before anything is recouped and what is the essential difference?
Providing a method of staking can be found that keeps things within bounds, there are ample grounds for varied stakes, especially if they can turn a loss into a profit. I have previously illustrated a staking method which will do just that, ensuring one point profit for each wager.
One major cause of downfall is greed, or put another way, an unrealistic view of a profit margin, the idea of something for nothing, a windfall of thousands for a few pence, 20-1 winners every time. All of it is wishful thinking. From the millions who play the horses the vast majority will lose, some heavily, and because they lack temperament they will continue to lose until they fall prey to addictive gambling.
A small percentage show a profit every season and minute number reap fortunes over a period. No one can join the few who succeed unless they are methodical, cultivate temperament, know the odds and accept the concept of reasonable profit margins all coupled with hard work.

If you can put aside all the old entrenched misconceptions there is every reason to
suppose you will eventually join the few. One of those misconceptions is to regard bookmakers as "the old enemy", they are nothing of the sort. They function as the middleman or wholesaler if you prefer, redistributing and taking a percentage for the service.
Sometimes it may be a high percentage, but the same applies with middlemen in other markets. You are not out to beat the bookmaker, but initially yourself, then you will be in a position to score over the mug punters who ignore reality, insisting upon flirting with disaster.
IMPOSSIBLE
Another misconception is that it is impossible to make profit by playing the favourite. This is complete nonsense and what is more, the further you stray from the market-leaders the less you are likely to succeed in the long run. Blindly following favourites is of course, useless, as statistics will show, but once you understand the real essence of racing and the market you can enjoy steady profitability.
Strange as it may seem, the fewer bets you make the more likely you are to be on the winning side. If you insist on betting down and across the cards there is no hope at all, but by being selective, restrained and prepared to put in the necessary work, you can stay on top.
One method I use selects perhaps two or three horses per week, never more and the prices seldom exceed 2-1, but they nearly all win. Another gives me no more than a couple of dozen all year, but it is unusual for one to lose.
Yet another finds not more than one a day, but not every day with a win percentage well into the eighties and all manner of prices, for instance, March 12, Desert Hero 20-1 and for the Cheltenham Festival. . . Gaye Brief 7-1, Badsworth Boy 2-1, and the Gold Cup winner Bregawn 100-30.
All these were achieved with the aid of nothing more than can be found each day in the Sporting Chronicle. Just a couple of reasonable bets per week make for content-ment, but half-a-dozen a day at 50p or One Pound will result in frustration. Small stake betting on Lady Luck's best will never get anywhere.
Resolve to be selective and find something that has everything going for it and stake all you would during a month of fifty pences or one pounds and pay tax with the bet. Whatever happens win or lose, you will learn a valuable lesson.
The punter who picks several horses a day combining them in fancy bets such as Yankees is bucking the odds. There is no place for taking this course of action if you sincerely wish to profit from racing. Multiple betting on the lines I illustrated last year is altogether different and, although some disagreed, the principle is sound providing you follow the commonsense path. Almost every day there are good multiple betting propositions and those who can accept the concept of reasonable profit margins have one of the safest betting methods there are.
In the past I have also tried to show some areas which harbour pitfalls for the unwary and one occasion pointed out how some let-downs occur with three-year-olds that had apparently dazzling credentials as two-year-olds. The situation at the start of the Flat season is completely different to that which prevails at the end, when interest again turns to National Hunt racing.
When the last moments of the Flat season ends and the media suddenly realises there is another branch of the sport, the jumpers have RUN INTO FORM. When the Flat starts, the media have tended to push aside the remaining weeks of the N.H. season in favour of the less hardy summer runners.
The punters lap it up having succumbed to heady indoctrination over many years,
and flutter away their cash on animals they know little about. Those first few weeks of a new Flat season see many graves dug, but if you have mastered that first essential you will not fill one of them.
I have always favoured judging horseflesh on what it achieves in public, but this can go hand-in-hand with logical deductions. There are innumerable ways of doing this,but perhaps the following may provide interest. Keeping a horse in training is not cheap and you will note that a fair number of two-year-olds are lightly raced during their first season. If they are kept in training it is for a good reason and the astute punter can profit by observing a few points during the first five or six weeks of the Flat. Watch closely
during these few weeks any horse that ran not more than three times as a two-year-old,
irrespective of whether it made the frame or not, indeed, it says a lot if it was unplaced.
NOTEBOOK
If it gains a place, 2nd or 3rd, with a speed figure of 75 plus, put it in your notebook as one to follow. The process will provide you with just a few bets which if you so choose can make your profit for the Flat. Many readers insist that any such methods should be proved to have succeeded for at least 10 years, well let us go one better and give it half as long again.
I pulled out my file for the 1967 Flat season and the first on my list was a horse
called Rope Ladder trained by H. Wragg, which for older readers tells a story. It ran
twice unplaced as a two-year-old, but on first run finished second with a speed figure of 76. Next time out it was made favourite, but was left at the start and took no part. Second time it obliged at 9-2.
Newcomers should proceed with caution and not see this as an ultimate means of selection, but just the framework. The more seasoned readers will appreciate the need to consider more than the bare essentials, for instance getting to know the particular trainer's methods.
Those fresh into the sport could well leave fillies alone for reasons which become obvious once they gain more knowledge. They could also select only those fancied in the market of the qualifying race, i.e. first, second or third favourite, for reasons which should be clear to anyone.
I have been at the game long enough to appreciate the situation and base ultimate selection on deeper knowledge. My intention is to lend caution to those not in that position and who still need to master temperament, nothing more.
EVALUATION
From the same file something that may interest regular readers who recall what I wrote regarding evaluation with specific reference to the 2,000 Guineas runners To- Agori-Mou and Mattaboy.
Royal Palace won the 2,000 Guineas that year going on to add the Derby to the tally. He ran only three times as a two-year-old winning at 6 furlongs and ONE MILE. The 2,000 Guineas was the first run of the season, followed by the Derby.
His only other run was to be third in the Champion Stakes at Newmarket in the October to that great little horse Reform (G. Richards), which won six times from seven starts as a two-year-old and five times from seven as a three-year-old.
The pair were split by the French horse Taj Dewan, which earlier, had finished second to Royal Palace in the 2,000 Guineas. I have said many times that I favour horses being judged by what they achieve in public and Reform is a case in point.
Van der Wheil, Market Harborough

why nickit?

http://racetipsuk.tripod.com/van_der_wheil_method.htm

It runs in the 3.00 at Folkstone ! and is probable fav.

You will note that it runs against Our Jolly Swagman !

Tc

AND !!!

I had the "balls" to back it !

( not a lot tho ! )

Good one.

Blimey don't a year pass quickly when you're having fun!

Letter 15 - March 1979


VDW S next wrote a letter for publication on March 8, as below:

HAS SPOTTED METHOD'S KEY

IN REPLY to G.Hall (11-1-79) can I first say that it was a method not a system, a
point as I recall that was stressed. However, I congratulate him on 'spotting the key' as
he describes it. The four bets mentioned were in fact 'good things' on the day in
question.

In my view temperament is an important factor in deciding the winning and losing
punters and in this respect I feel some concern regarding our friend's apparent
impatience at fewer bets during the N.H. season and his liking for fancy bets.

The method I gave produces 85% to 90% winners Flat and jumps, year in year out. I
low that during the N.H. season there can be long waits just as we have had until
January 20. The only 'good thing' Love From Verona won 12/1. There are of course,
days during the Flat when nothing can be found and there is no point in trying to find
what is not there.

%i

Our friend has enjoyed a profitable season and I ask that he think hard about the
factor of temperament and refrain from throwing away the advantage so far gained in
the sure knowledge that there is plenty more to come from the same source.

Regarding form placings P, F, U etc., it is a matter of commonsense really. A horse
can be pulled up for a number of reasons and an effort should be made to determine the
cause. If it be found that when being pulled up, 'going conditions' were the cause, there
is no problem, but if it was a question of fitness, then it is a different kettle of fish. The
same goes for fallers, a slip on landing is not the same as a crashing fall after going
through the top of the fence. Many times I've seen horses have a slight mishap without
actually falling, resulting in the jockey parting company, but the form has shown F
(fell) when next running. In the main I suggest calculating backwards, but take note as
above.

As an example, December 29, Newbury, 2.0.
Weyhill Handicap Chase. The three principles are marked *

^

811-13 Mafia King 5*
136L14- Beige Prince 15*
LP1-FPP Endurance Trust -
1/22L1L- Queens College 21
P4P12-F Uther Pendragon I* Won 11/2
514002- StCadwaldr 22

If our friend insists upon more bets he may care to note the two shortest priced
forecast favourites at the two main meetings and check their merit using the same
criteria as in the other method. Again, he will achieve a high win ratio, but alas, the
prices will be short although profitable if use is made of the staking plan I also gave.

Again January 20, of the two horses only one qualifies. Gaffer won 3/1.

C. Van der Wheil, Market Harborough.

17

Basic VDW Method can be found at -


http://racetipsuk.tripod.com/van_der_wheil_method.htm#Van%20Der%20Wheil%20Method

Thanks again for your help.

Roushayd - From "Systematic Betting"


I
am going to illustrate one of my methods that has proved effective for many
years and which will undoubtedly continue to do so.
Once again, I will use Roushayd but first of all let me give some information
about him which should be associated with remarks made later.
Roushayd ran twice as a two-year-old, coming out at Kempton on September 6
over 7 furlongs (class 32) and finishing 2nd. Note what is said later about the
better horses coming out later and being lightly raced as two-year-olds. Also
note the distance raced over, (not the minimum five furlongs) and also note
the track. His second outing was at Newbury on September 19 (class 56) over
one mile where he finished 4* and showing a lot of improvement in this higher
class and at a greater distance.

19

As a three-year-old Roushayd ran eight times, winning three times. Class
ratings were progressively 12 over extended 1 mile 3 furlongs, 39 over 1m 4f
and 641 over 1m 4f. Raced also in class 9 over one mile 2 furlongs and class
604 over 1 mile 6 furlongs and note that he was out of the first three both times.
I will now show Roushayd's first four races in 1988 and will make all necessary
comments for you to gain a fall understanding. In each case I will show the
race as it finished noting previous class of race and also placings.

Newmarket April 14th 1m 4f class 50

Previous race --- Distance Miles--- Placing--- Horse

Class 31-- 1m4f--2nd--First Division Fav 7/2
Seasonal debut---------Vouchsafe Jt 2nd Fav
Seasonal debut---------Roushayd Jt 2nd Fav
Seasonal debut---------Professional Girl


Class 31 slow race--1m4f--- Greenhills Joy
Seasonal debut-------------Chauve

Class 296-------1m----12th--- Regal Ambition (12th in Lincoln)

Seasonal debut------------Dunphys Special

In the early season a lot of confusion can occur with first runs and, it is true,
recent form is more reliable but you do have to note what each horse has
previously done in other years so as not to fall foul of some of the many
potholes laying in wait to trip you up. Let us first look at the three horses which
had been out that season. Always keep in mind that class comes first. The
highest class rating (269) is Regal Ambition, so start with him. The class comes
from a run in the Lincoln, but the form was down the field and he showed
nothing after the first 5 furlongs. This horse was always placed out of reach of
the prize in respect of class and distance. The Lincoln is a mile race, compared
with 1m 4fand there is nothing here for Regal Ambition. Many times before I
have offered an equation for the route to winners and it is Consistent form +
Ability (class) + Capability + Probability + Hard Work = Winners. Please think
about it.

First Division and Greenhills Joy are the only others with a run and both
showed previous class to be 31. Both ran over today's distance, Greenhills Joy
at Haydock and First Division at Kempton. Greenhills Joy won her race and
First Division was second in his. Both were first outings but, although

20
Greenhills Joy won, her form upon inspection is below that of First Division.
A slow race and the closing stages show hers was less of a test. In the previous
season Greenhills Joy had a hard campaign, running 14 times and winning three
races of class 21,28 and 52. First Division ran four times, winning once in class
78. There is little doubt that First Division is the most probable winner although
the evidence would not have me reaching for my wallet.

Roushayd who finished third, ran a reasonable race considering he was obvi-
ously backward but didn't set anything alight. Roushayd was next placed at
Newbury in a class 77 race on May 14th and the field is set out as before.

Newbury May 14th extended 1m 5 f class 77

Previous Race Distance Placing Horse

Class 79---1m2f -----won---Merce Cunningham 15/8 fav
Class 254 ---2m-----2nd -- Shimsheck 2nd
Seasonal Debut ----------- Ibn Bey 3rd
Class 50 ---- 1m 4f --- 3rd --Roushayd 4th
Class 249 -- ext 2m 5f --- 4th -- Ala Hounak
Class 50 --- 1m 4f -- 6th -- Chauve Souris
Class 37 --- 1m 2f -- 6th -- Golden Isle
Class 32 --1m 4f -- 5th --Milton Burn
Class 26 -- 1m 4f -- 2nd --Our Eliaso

First of all let me point out that the bottom three can be discarded straight away
because they have not the class or the form for this race. Roushayd and Chauve
Souris can also be put to one side, leaving Shimshek, Ala Hounak and Mere
Cunningham to be considered first, but please note there is a possible spanner
in the works in the shape of the high class Ibn Bey, with class 984 his final race
last season.

On recent running, Shimshek has the highest previous race class, finishing
second in a five horse race over 2 miles, but when you examine the form it does
not make the pulse quicken. The race was slow AND THE HORSE DID
NOTHING FROM THE DISTANCE. When looking at the race before, it
shows a considerable downturn so is not "on" here. Shimshek, however, was
only beaten a head and this should indicate to you the importance of class.
Ala Hounak comes next but, again with a poor showing, fourth of six and well
beaten five furlongs out before being tailed off. He had not shown anything
earlier either, so is not "on" for this race.

21

Mere Cunningham started the season by winning over an extended 1 mile 3
furlongs in class 32 at Bath. He was then raised to class 79 over 1 mile 2
furlongs at Newmarket, winning and showing the tell-tale card marking of
much improvement. He is then dropped a little and a most likely winner, but
not a certainty, by virtue of factors which you should by now have picked upon
- higher class horses in the field, distance and of course the possible spanner in
the works - Ibn Bey. Many would plunge in and this time just save their bacon,
but it is still flaunting the odds which is a cardinal sin. With regard to Roushayd
he still has not come to the boil.

The next outing for Roushayd was the Northern Dancer Handicap class 227 over
1m 4fat Epsom on June 3rd.

Previous Race

Class 48 -- 1m 3f --- won ---Billet won 9/2
Class 139 -- 1m 4f --- 2nd -- Island Set 2nd
Class 39 -- 1m 4f --- 5th --Hauwmal 3rd
Class 9 --- 1m 2f --- won -- Rambo Dancer
Class 29 -- 1m 4f --- 2nd -- Empire Blue
Class 77 -- 1m 4f --- 4th -- Roushayd 6th
Class 34 -- 1m 4f --- 5th -- Vouchsafe
Class 48 -- 1m 3f --- 0 -----Freeby's Preacher
Class 48 -- 1m 3f --- 2nd -- Failiq

Here Roushayd, Billet and Failiq are the ones to look at first with Island Set and
Hauwmal only coming in if the first three do not "show". Freeby's Preacher is
not even possible.

Roushayd with the highest class is not yet ready as previously noted but has to
be respected on class.

With Billet, we have once again the give away of card marking. Billet came out
of class 39 at Ascot finishing second but showing good form for a first run. He
was then raised in class to 48 over 1m 3 f, winning and showing good form and
improvement thus marking the card but he is raised considerably in class now.
Failiq was second to Billet last time but had been dropped in class a long way
and had not got enough from the distance. There's nothing to show possible
reversal this time.

Once again this gives a clear indication of the possible winner in Billet but is
not good enough for me on points which should by now be clear. It is here that

. 22


Roushayd comes towards the boil showing once again that classic give away of
improvement in higher class and he ought now to be placed to win.
Roushayd lines up for the Old Newton Cup at Hay dock class 170 1m 4fJuly
2nd.

Previous Race -- Distance --Placinging -- Horse
Class 227 -- 1m 4f -- 6th -- Roushayd Won 6/1
Class 114 -- 1m 4f -- 0 -- He de Chypre 2nd
Class 116 -- 1m 4f -- Won -- Vouchsafe 3rd
Class 17 -- 1m 5f -- Won -- Tender Type
Class 17 -- 1m 4f -- 9th of 10 -- High Tension
Class 296 -- 1m 4f -- 12thofl4 -- Clifton Chapel
Class 116 -- 1m 4f -- 0 -- Freeby's Preacher
Class 95 -- 1m 4f -- 4th -- Joseph
Class 35 -- lm6f -- 0 -- Positive Way

Tender Type, High Tension, Joseph and Positive Way are automatically
scrubbed out as having no chance and Freeby's Preacher joins them through
poor form as shown previously so we are left with four. Clifton Chapel top on
class but he goes out because the distance is all wrong. Note, however, that class
comes from his 12th in the Derby where he was tailed off in the final half mile.
The colt has shown 1m 4fis too far at present. This race is reduced to Roushayd,
Vouchsafe and He de Chypre.

Roushayd showed the classic give away, marking the card in the Northern
Dancer where, raised in class he showed considerable improvement and is now
on the boil. He is a long way clear on class, apart from Clifton Chapel and is
being dropped to collect over his best distance.
Vouchsafe who was behind Roushayd in the Northern Dancer, where he
showed improvement, and was dropped in class last time out to collect. He is
now going up in class again and does not have the measure of Roushayd.
lie de Chypre ran very well in the King George V at Ascot until unseating his
rider inside the last furlong. Before that he was second in a class 36 race but is
a long way behind Roushayd on class and is raised for this event like all the
others bar Clifton Chapel. A maiden and no match for Roushayd.
This is the obvious race for Roushayd, having shown the classic signs and he is
placed to take advantage so it is time to strike and bring home the bacon through
hard work.

23

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

VDW followed the Roushayd Chapter with an Article talkingaboutthe Roushad "Speed Figures" leading up to the Race - This is it.


Chapter Six
SPEED FIGURES

THE majority of punters seem to require a numerate basis upon which to
evaluate races and there are many ways this can be done, although the two most
frequently used concepts are handicaps ratings based on weights and speed
figures based upon time. Racefbrm Handicap Book readers may well be more
inclined to favour speed figures for which this publication is renowned. There
are of course, other sources for ratings and it is interesting that they do not
always agree.

I have long held the view that there is not any one swgle factor which can
determined the probable winner in a race but time has shown over the years to
be extremely useful and there are many ways to utilise it. Horses do not
consistently produce the same speed figure and it is interesting that frequently
their best performance on this basis does not result in a visit to the winner's
enclosure.

Various means of evaluation can lead you to the same conclusions and I will
return briefly to one of my favourite races the Old Newton Cup at the early July
Haydock meeting, which is where Roushayd appeared a certainty. Many
readers of Raceform Handicap Book will know that I place a great deal of
emphasis upon class but, as I have said many times, a single facto? is not good
enough. On a class basis as was show earlier, Roushayd was out on his own in
this handicap and the fact that a false favourite in the shape of lie de Chypre was
installed gave a useful starting price of 6/1 although on a proper evaluation
Roushayd was the only horse at the races. For the moment I will assume that
the reader knows something about racing and suggest he looks at the situation
objectively from the time aspect. Roushayd's first race of the 1988 season was
at Newmarket in a 1m 4f handicap of reasonable class. He finished 3rd with
modest speed figure of 27. His next race was at Newbury, lifted in class to a
listed race over 1m 5f. This time he finished 4th with the same modest speed
figure of 27. He was then sent to Epsom to contest the much higher class
Northern Dancer Handicap over 1m 4f, where he finished 6th but with a speed
figure of 65: a significant improvement . Having thus marked his card, the
astute punter will watch with interest how the trainer places him. Next time out
he went to Haydock to contest successfully the Old Newton Cup, which is a
much lower class race. He de Chypre and Vouchsafe who dominated the market
in front of Roushayd were both out of significantly lower class and indeed both
were going up for this race beyond what they had shown they could achieve. He
de Chypre began the season in a maiden at Newmarket with a modest perform-
ance and a speed figure of21. His next effort was at Royal Ascot, whacked up

24

in class in the King George V Handicap over 1m 4f, where he made a good
show until unseating the jockey inside the last furlong. He then came to the Old
Newton Cup but without, in my view, the credentials required and was to my
mind a short priced false favourite who did not possess the class to beat
Roushayd. The only other horse in the race worthy of consideration was the
second favourite Vouchsafe, who started the season in the same race as
Rouchayd beating him a short head but this was not a good performance as he
clocked a speed figure of only 15. His next race was again over 1m 4fbut in
lower class. Although he finished only 5th, it was a much better performance
with a speed figure of 42. Then he was once more running against Roushayd in
the Northern Dancer Handicap over 1m 4f, but this time finishing behind the
latter but once again we have the classic example of a horse pushed up in class
and improving. So Vouchsafe marked his card for you. Next time out in much
lower class Vouchsafe scored at 12/1.

I would ask you to recall a couple of things said earlier. First you are not looking
for the winner OF the race but seeing if there is a winner IN the race. Remember
also I said the market did not necessarily represent the true odds about the
contestants' chances and I hope the above will illustrate the point for you. It was
then all three lined up for the Old Newton Cup at Hay dock over 1m 4f where
they finished, Roushayd 1st, He de Chypre 2nd, Vouchsafe 3rd.

If you can assimilate the above data, I want you to notice in particular that
Roushayd was the horse coming out of much higher class than the other two.
He had also improved considerably in that class and was now being dropped and
ready to make his visit to the winner's enclosure.

The two placed horses both showed significant improvement in this race but
Vouchsafe did not run again. He de Chypre was next whacked up in class at
Haydock and again showed improvement, clocking a speed figure of 64 which
in turn marked his card and he obliged next time out at Newbury, placed in a
maiden which if he had not won would surely have been the failure of the season.
I trust readers have grasped what has been portrayed, a combination of class,
speed figure and improved performance. All of these horses showed improve-
ment in higher class, which was noted by their speed figure, before visiting the
winner's enclosure when next dropped in class. This is a viable method of
evaluating EXPOSED form. It does require time and dedication and it is also
useful to make a list of horses which mark their own card but remember it does
not stop there. Every time the race must be evaluated with cold unemotional
logic not with the preconceived notion that you already know which horse is
going to win. There could well be another horse which has been brought along
that could throw a spanner in the works and unless you have acquired that first
indispensable asset you may well miss it until after the race is over and it is no
good seeing the red light then.

25

Just to throw a Spanner in the works - I attach - Jock Binghams contribution to thr subject of Roushayd!



FOREWORD

Just over a year ago a friend of mine John Collins (J.C.) suggested that I
release the full method to the V.D.W. example of'Roushayd' J.C. in his own
right is the ultimate conclusion to V.D.W. racing methodology.

On taking up his idea I decided to give as many evaluations as possible
covering the last twelve month period of March '98' to February '99'. If you
analyse the method properly you should note that a horse does not always
have to produce its best speed figure to visit the winners enclosure.

The missing links from the Roushayd example were peak fitness and the
capability to perform well with todays weight. Also note how the trainer is
training a particular horse. He is using quality (class) to bring the horse to
peak fitness (speed).

When he thinks the horse is fit enough to do itself justice, it is then
dropped to run against lower quality horses (class). It is a well known fact
that in horse racing about eighty five percent of all winners are dropped in
class to win whatever the type of race.

The evaluations are what myself and J.C. considered to be quite
reasonable bets. Like all methods of evaluation commonsense must always
prevail no matter what the figures might say.

For example if there is only three, four, five or six runners in a race.
«' Is your horse in the top 3 class last time out or the bottom 3?

Care should be taken in races with ten or less runners and your selection
is two points or more above the number of runners. Sometimes you have an
instinct as to the evaluation not being all it seems to be. When this happens I
would suggest that you keep your money in your pocket. After all there is
always another day.

Always be careful of last time out winners being sent over a distance that
is has never won over again let your instinct guide you.

Check how the horse performed last time out. Did it have a hard race?

Check any Jockey changes, professional last time out to an apprentice for
todays race. Has the apprentice shown any form on the horse?


After a while experience will tell you what to do under these
circumstances. As V.D.W. always said you do not have to bet everything that
you think should win. The real object of the exercise is to keep yourself in the
black.

It may be worthwhile at this stage to mention that many V.D.W.
enthusiasts have been searching for the key to his first method of the three
most consistent horses from the first five in the betting, handicaps. First four
in the betting non. Handicaps for decades.

The key to Roushayd is the answer. Check it out for yourself and you
really will be surprised. It is a hard climb to the top of the racing rainbow but
once there, enjoy the slide down,

You should have noted by now that the trainer is the only one to be '
guided by. He shows you by one means how he brings a horse to peak fitness.
By watching how the horse is being placed will always give the clues as to his
intentions for the horse. Commonsense tells you that it is of more benefit to
the horse to be brought to peak fitness against better class horses. Then
dropped to win against lower class horses.

Now you have the tools for the trade and been given the tuition on how to
use them. The one thing that cannot be given is temperament. In the racing
game one fact will always remain, if you can't cultivate temperament then
you have absolutely - nothing. The object of the exercise for this book was to
show that it is far better to learn how a trainer brings his horses to peak
fitness. Rather than spend a lifetime looking for that elusive system. This
training method works year in year out over both rules and at all levels.

Ask yourself this, if the trainer does not know what he is doing then who
does?

Is it better to bring horses to peak fitness against better class or lower
class horses?


Is it better to back a horse that is proven with todays weight or unproven

with todays weight?

Class = quality of horses ran against.

Speed = guide to horses level of fitness.

Form = 1st, 2nd or 3rd.

Weight = Able to show form with todays weight.

Best wishes
John Bingham & J.C.


----------

CHECKS

1. Consider the top 3 class horses with a run last time out.

2. The three most consistent horses.

CLASS = Penalty value of the race. Cross off the last two numbers for an easy
rating.

EXAMPLE Penalty value of race £2,000 = Class 20
Penalty value of race £2,200 = Class 22
Penalty value of race £3,100 = Class 31

SPEED Check topspeed column (R-Post)

When last time out and master rating the same = peak.
Other speed figures found in the horses form under t/s.

ie 3 most consistent horses are from.
The first 5 in the betting forecast - handicaps.
The first 4 in the betting forecast - non handicaps.
With the 3 lowest form figure total from their last 3 runs.
Ran twice or more during the current season.
Do not have to be dropped in class.

Top 3 class horses.
If only ran once - must have won.

NOTES Add any claiming jockeys weight on to actual weight carried.
Do not consider any race with odds - on fav. in it.

-

EVALUATIONS


-------------


2-3-98 4.55 Newc. HCP.HDL Class 28

INVEST WISELY Jt.3rd Highest Class Horse.
Weight 10st.71b. Form 344

Class Speed Form Weight

27 64 3rd* llst.lllb.

28 80

39 85 peak

* With 181b. more than todays weight.

Never been dropped in class - now being dropped.
No downturn in speed figures - peak fitness last time out.

PRICE 11-2 WON 9-1


--------------

6-3-98 3.50 Kels. NON.HCP.HDL

The 3 most cons. from the first 4 in the betting.

DEEP WATER Form 11

LEDGENDRY LINE Form 211

LEVECTICUS Form 312 No downturn + peak

LEVECTICUS Weight 10st.81b.
Class Speed Form Weight

28 80

29 94 "¢

49 115 peak 2nd* llst.71b.

* With 131b. more than todays weight.

The only one with no downturn in class or speed figures
and showed peak fitness last time out.

WON 6-1



----------------



7-3-98 4.10 Donc. HCP.CHS Class 135

THE TOISEACH 3rd Highest Class Horse.
Weight 10st.81b. Form 311

Class Speed Form Weight

26 - 103

42 - 132

188 - 139 peak won* llst.5 1b.

* With ll lb. more than todays weight.

Never been dropped in class - now being dropped.
No downturn in speed figures - peak fitness last time out.

PRICE 6-4 WON 7-4

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

Thanks for this, TC.

This is the first time I've read Jock Bingham, and he doesn't seem too bad.

Topspeed seems to be a big thing.

I'll look into it, I think.