Mtoto

In my view the probables device (purely numerical in character) is best thought of as part of consistency, ie to reduce, if it can, the number of consistent horses where initially four or more. Sometimes use of the device will remove an otherwise consistent horse which, if it had gone forward to the next stage, would have been a form horse. But of course many horses eliminated at the very first stage, because of not being consistent horses, were also form horses.

As regards the King's Ride race, I believe there were four consistent horses, all probables, of which only the selection was also a form horse, and yes there are several other Van der Wheil races where the same is true. So yes, these selections don't involve the ability rating - up to the point of identifying the class/form horse. But I believe the ability rating ranking is highly material as to whether a class/form horse is regarded as a bet - and have yet to find one sure Van der Wheil bet (or horse described as a certainty or outstanding) lower than 5th in the ranking.

Good evening everybody


If it is down to the trainers strike rate at a certain track , then surely this means different types of horses suited to cetain courses can not exist.
However if horses suited to certain courses does exist how does that explain that certain top trainers have very good strike rates at lots of different tracks, as all the winning horses can not be suited to all the different tracks that they win at.

SO what i am trying to say is what has the most importance , trainers high strike rate or horses suited to courses

If it is down to the trainers strike rate at a certain track , then surely this means different types of horses suited to cetain courses can not exist.[/quote]

.................................................................

Are you sure that different types of horses cannot be suited to certain racecourses Paul? am i reading this right?.

Walter

Im sure Mtoto would say that horses are suited to a certain course most of the time , however how can a trainer have such high srtike rates with so many horses that are suited to one single track. Pick any top trainer who has a consistently high strike rate at Ascot.Is it likely that the majority are really best suited to ascot or is it down to the trainers skill of getting the horse to peak and placing the horse in the right company.

Cant argue with that m8 thanks for that.

George,

Ok so far so good. I make the probable's for the Kings Ride race, Kings Ride (of course), Running Jump, Handsome Kid and Gibbon. So the first thing is do you agree? Running Jump is easily eliminated because so long of the course, Handsome Kid his 2nd last race wasn't up to much. The problem is Gibbon, I can't quite see what he has done wrong, higher A/R, won better races than KR. So if he is one of your probable's why is he not a form horse?

Be Lucky

Funky Gibbon - Goodies!.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXq8rELhUkw

Mtoto

In my view neither Gibbon nor Running Jump were consistent horses for the race. Both outside the first six and equals in the forecast and neither meeting Van der Wheil's criteria for "highly consistent horses" outside the forecast.

In addition to King's Ride and Handsome Kid, the consistent horses were Be Better (one of the three lowest consistency scores within the first six of the forecast) and Smartset (a "highly consistent horse" outside the first six in the forecast).

I agree with you that Gibbon was a form horse.

Paul,

Some good questions there! I don't know any definitive answer. Imo, all the math in racing is just an approximation: nothing is totally invincible.

SR is only an average, and averages can be a bit dodgy when making decisions.
All I know is that I've found that a good SR is mostly a positive factor, so it's something I like to see in a selection. Fk knows what vdw said or thought about it, but bollix to him, anyway!

So far, the testing of short-priced, highly -tipped things has produced two losers ( both placed) out of two.
When I checked out the winners, I found that a good SR was evident ( 75%SR in today's case!).

We'll see. Then, perhaps we won't; I don't know. When I've got ten daily results, I'll post 'em up. Then the vdw-ers can post their last ten selections and we can all see how much better they do.

quote:

In my view neither Gibbon nor Running Jump were consistent horses for the race. Both outside the first six and equals in the forecast and neither meeting Van der Wheil's criteria for "highly consistent horses" outside the forecast.

George,

Again I think I can follow your thinking. BUT how does Son Of Love become a highly consistent horse outside the forecast with the figures of 224?

Be Lucky

Mtoto

I think if you study the Pegwell Bay example you'll find the answer.

Two horses I will back tomorrow win and place.

Rochefort 325K
Ascalon 340H

Strike The Deal 310H looks terrific value at the current 20/1 for a place.

I think if you study the Pegwell Bay example you'll find the answer.

George,

Funny you should say that as I was looking at that example when I asked the question. Using the logic that puts Bishops Yarn in front of Warner For Leisure consistency wise, and is backed up by the Erin figures. If consistent horses outside the forecast don't count how do you get a 5 for PK and a 7 for DF? I can see no way Son Of Love qualifies as a highly consistent horse, therefore can not be a probable (which he must be to be the selection) . That is IF as you think the probable's are based just on form figures, and position in the forecast. How does Ekbalco figure using your method? For me he is another one that would have problems if being a probable is based on form figures.

Be Lucky

Mtoto

The Ekbalco race is one of a number where the probables device does not help. In my view one starts of, as with the 1978 Erin, with four consistent horses but, unlike with the Erin, applying the probables device does not eliminate any of them.

The numbers you quote in relation to Decent Fellow and Prominent King are not consistency totals but their probables numbers.

Leopardstown & Haydock bite the dust.

Just the one bet for me today on the horses Kempton 2.50 Galactic Star 4.7 & 1.83 win and place - loaded the place should run really well if taking to the sand as he is hitting top form now.

I'd seriously think about putting all of your stake on the place and scratch the win bet Walter. Days since last run is interesting:


Galactic Star
0-14 days: 12
15-21 days: 11
22-28 days: 148
29days+: 52532

condensed
0-28 days:1211148
29 days+: 52532

Its only a wee bet fir interest EC ive gone 40/60 on Galactic if he`s placed its money back wi a wee profit if he manages to win then all good and well.My main bet of the week is a lay of Scotland at around 13/8 against Macedonia K.0.2.00pm this is a max for me so im looking to collect.

good luck Walter