Vincent, et al,

Perhaps I should explain my position for better understanding. I am not on an ego trip and would never deliberately post race assessments after time. Where I am, is being 72 years old having had major surgery for cancer and a mild stroke I know very well that I have more to look back on than to look forward too, and that's a fact. Before I pass into oblivion I would like to pass on some of my hard won betting experience to try and asssist others in avoiding some of the pitfalls.

In the case of the Van der Wheil I only post because there is still so much interest in his methodology. In fact for many years I have made my own race assessments in a different manner, mainly owing to the fact that employing 'good consistency' as the main assessment criterion severely restricts the races available for consideration.

In particular my post to Les was that following the basic VDW methodology points you to only consider high class races with plenty of 'good consistent' horses. The Newbury 5.05 Mar 28 was not such a race, except the winner Major Euro 11/1 did have the best consistent form if you assess it as VDW advizes. Myself, I thought the contenders were in order of merit, William Bonney, Tanikos, Coach Lane - which wasn't much help

Well, imo, Jack, like others here, is a brilliant poster. Long may he continue - never mind about the moving on!

In some ways Vincent was wrong to include his first paragraph AFTER he had discovered that the point he intended making ( aftertiming?) was unfounded.

I know I used to do that sort of thing when i got in rows years ago. Nowadays, being old, too, I try not to do it, as it just upsets without helping.

Still happens om occasions though!

quote:

Having studied Vincents last post for an Hour
It would appear the mystery poster he is refering to is Jack

Boozer,

Again I would be very surprised, and I can't really see how Jack has moved on, in fact he has only just arrived.

Fear not I'm sure all will be revealed as Vincent is in the gallery.

Be Lucky

Hello

It appears some confusion has arisen surrounding my initial "ramblings".

It is now clear to me that the timings concerned were as I had previously seen (oh for a print screen at the time) and were due to the annual alteration of the clock.

ALL

I have no quarrel or will do.

Jack

You are still young and have plenty to offer, wisdom is a life of experience and the future is always changing. I do not believe you are on an ego trip nor have I done, please again accept my apologies if I may seem to have caused upset.

Mtoto

I was not aware of the post given by the above person and accept what you had said. period

The first VDW race IS full of mistakes. MR G I think has already pointed out a reason why. The weights are correct and the mistake is VDW not the source and that highlights ones record keeping.

The second race also fails but you seem (although I may be incorrect) to be perhaps not so concerned. I would ask why? This particular race was certainly given a little more detail yet is blatantly WRONG.

The third race given more in depth scrutiny is wrong more in the sense that it is of no relation to the first two and is merely an after thought for a system/shortcut.

Mtoto you kind sir have been around VDW boards for some considerable time and I am sure are very astute in those matters.

Sean Rua

I made an apology unaware at the time of Jacks post on a different forum and have again apologised. period

JiB

You say you use the OR, your measure? Would you take heed more of beaten than bet by?

All

VDW passed over an awful lot of what had been and still is being portrayed as playing the market end. There is or are no secret numbers, it is all very basic and simplistic, good recent proven form.

So that said lets get curious - Your Winner in a Race could be the winner of his/her race, look in your mirror and check your distance.

No VDW post would be complete without a wee quote - "Speed is no use without form" - would that rip apart something above?


THANK YOU

VINCENT

PS The future WILL always change.

Vincent,

I take it the first race is the Erin. However the 2nd and 3rd races are giving me a problem. Do you mean The Old Fellows race, and then one of the races in SIAO? Are you including Pegwell Bay or Roushayd? It would be far easier if you just named them.

There is or are no secret numbers, it is all very basic and simplistic, good recent proven form.

Here if you are talking about the "stray" Erin figures I THINK I agree with you. As you say once they are understood they are no longer secret, but at face value they don't make sense.

Have to admit I'm a little disapointed you haven't said who the poster is we could learn from. There have been many good posters on here and some have left for various reasons, but naming the one you think is worth a 2nd read just might help us all.

Be Lucky

have a wee feeling your look in the mirror statement should be taken at face value[pardon the pun]vincent

yes vincent i get the feeling that most of the posters are inside the last 2 furlongs good g_d you know how to perk someone up

Vincent,

At some stage of its career, barring juveniles and novices, a horse will have run against animals rated better than itself. The resulting performance is one that I like to analyse.

JIB

Exposed form?

To profile?

Would be nice to climb on board a novice before the form became exposed and the price went.

Les what does a mirror expose bar my or your ug mut?

THANK YOU

VINCENT

how did you know i had a face like a bulldog licking pish off a thistle so the wife says

Lee
Member

With a helpful nudge, you should now see that what a horse does from the distance, or doesn't do, can only be gauged by the opposition that it faces. *What happens down the field is of no real interest to us as form students*.
............................................
Vincent
Member

So that said lets get curious - Your Winner in a Race could be the winner of his/her race, *look in your mirror and check your distance.Les what does a mirror expose bar my or your ug mut*?
............................................



.

quote:

Look out behind You!
?

whats going on behind?

vdw did say somthing about checking the distance beaten i think 5 lengths was quoted i like to go half a length per furlong myself .whats left are those that were in it at the finnish

If you finish 6th btn 9l as Roushayd was have you still to look behind you? where does that fit in with Lee`s statement of what happens down the field is of little interest to form students?.

i take he,s saying to check what any selection you make what it had behind in its last 3 races wither better horses bhr rated than your selection,or it was well rated and had not much behind

Im told the top van der wheely boys dont use the (OR).

well vdw also spoke of when the favorite won no change there ?i also think he ment the best horse top bhb rating just my oppinion hes telling you to watch for inferior horses rating wise in among better rated horses then watch were there placed he may have disregarded weight at that point in the assesment?

the roushyad example used ability ratings rather than bhb ratings.weight changes or class changes or distance changes before being placed to win.the trainer knows already what he has.this is where the ability rating is good,the three previous races are all about getting it fit and weighted correctly for the day