All this meaningless cant.
Ectoo claims a 19/22 strike rate, yet can't make a profit on 2 bets .
GJ insists he understands it, yet can't answer the simplest of questions , and Mtoto tells us he makes a living from it, but never has a bet .
Do you know how daft you all sound?
FFS, if you think you know - prove it!

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

Mtoto tells us he makes a living from it, but never has a bet.

You are a plank. What I said was .........As said the other day I'm not backing horses for personal reasons, and won't start until I can get my head right. Now I understand your head is never right so you wouldn't be able to understand that thinking.

There has been a sudden and very unexpected death in my family. I have been trying to use these forums to keep my mind active, and of other matters. Have to say it was working until you reappeared. Are you really incapable of having a discussion without resorting to childish remarks?????

I think you have single handily ruined this forum, and being the fool you are you can't even see it. I don't think there is anyone with a real interest in VDW that you haven't insulted along the way.

I have thought about this, the only expression I think you will understand is why don't you just **** of.

Mtoto

What you said was:

quote:

No I don't really enjoy going around in circles. I don't need a diploma, because due to ill health I was forced to make a living from backing horses. I'm still here making a living, and I will say I started with a far smaller bank than many think is necessary. So all this talk about not backing horses does get up my nose.

THe fact is that you've claimed this for a while now, but there is not one shred of evidence to support it, in all your years on the board. Truth is, what few selections you have put up have been poor, and in no way profitable.
The people who have ruined this board are such as yourself. who make wild-arsed claims and do nothing to substantiate them. Go back as far as you like on this forum, then tell me that isn't true.

Paul

quote:

What do you mean by match. I THOUGHT EACH RACE WAS A DIFFERENT PUZZLE

By "match" all I meant was to identify those class/form horses which have the same characteristics as Van der Wheil's stated bets, "certainties" and "outstanding bets", ie his strongest selections.

In practical terms, once I identify a class/form horse I copy the data for it (on the lines referred to by Trypod) from the Excel sheet used to analyse the race and paste it into one where the comparable data for the relevant Van der Wheil selections are already saved. This latter sheet is set up, via the conditional formatting function, to make it easy to see whether the data for the current class/form horse matches up. For example, all the relevant Van der Wheil selections had a top five ability rating ranking. So the "ability rating ranking" cells have a conditional format applied which means they turn red if a number above 5 is entered. A red cell there, or anywhere else in those cells into which data for the current class/form horse has been pasted, is sufficient to make the horse concerned not a bet for me at my current level of understanding.

Johnd

quote:

GJ insists he understands it, yet can't answer the simplest of questions

GJ hopes he understands it - it is not a question of insists.

As to answering questions, I hope that you are the only poster here who has asked me a question that I have not answered, for as a matter of courtesy I always try to answer any question put to me and if I have failed to answer anyone else it was an oversight and not deliberate. But you'll recall that in your case I replied by pointing out that I had earlier asked you one and you had not responded. Courtesy, as far as I am concerned, needs to be mutual.

JOHND

You are one sick BASTARD.

Mtoto has told you that there has been a death in his family, it does not get any worse than that, yet you still have to have the last say.

Why do'nt you show the man some respect in this instance you low life piece of scum.


Do you have family or have they all disowned you

MTOTO

MY CONDOLENCE TO YOU AND YOUR FAMILY

GEORGE

THANK YOU

Paul

As usual, your grasp of the situation is a million miles from reality.
While I do have sympathy with Mtoto's plight, it does not excuse his using it as a platform for another attack on yours truly.
We all have crosses to bear, (Yours more obvious than most ), but this is hardly a suitable place for their discussion.

FFS!

I can't believe this johndolt cnt!
Everything on the thread is going along nicely; we seem to be making headway, albeit inch by inch,
when out pops johndolt, sixguns blazing, shooting shit just the same as he did before he stated that he was through with the forum and was off to subscribe to his own exclusive club!

What a cnt!

Not everyone here is a knocker like me; we have some very decent vdw-ers like Mtoto and George Johns, yet, this jdolt pillock sees fit to try to spoil things once again, with his drug-fuelled bollix ( the prat must be on medication - even when they let him out of the asylum).
What a cnt! What a pity!

My condolences , Mtoto.
Personally, I'm satisfied that you do make the game pay. Like you said, it's a case of having to, as a result of ill-health.
And George Johns is a helpful sort who is always polite, so I can't, for the life of me, think why jdolt picks on these two guys.

Formites
Why do you reply to Johnd's posts, if they are of a upsetting nature dont answer him, send him to Coventry till he changes his outlook. He must be having a good old chuckle at the uproar he is causing. He is well capable of posting constructive and intelligent posts but until he does just ignore him.

What ye mean - kind eh isolate the man until he learns to come roond sort oh thing?.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_lVFbyGn1Q&feature=related

quote:

Originally posted by trypod:
Formites
Why do you reply to Johnd's posts, if they are of a upsetting nature dont answer him, send him to Coventry till he changes his outlook. He must be having a good old chuckle at the uproar he is causing. He is well capable of posting constructive and intelligent posts but until he does just ignore him.

There is a facility for those that want use it to not see certain members' posts. If you click the members' name in the left-hand column, a little menu pops up. On the menu is "Add MembersName to my Ignore List".

quote:

Originally posted by johnd:
BlackCat

Screw you, the morons you continue to support, and screw the forum.
This will be my last post unless or until the stench is cleared from this place.

quote:

Originally posted by johnd:
Mtoto

The people who have ruined this board are such as yourself.

Let's see... who doesn't get on with each other at the moment?

Johnd and Sean
Johnd and Paul
Johnd and BlackCat
Johnd and Ectoo
Johnd and Mtoto

I would add "johnd and George", but George is clearly above taking the bait – although goodness knows, johnd has tried!

Can anyone spot the common denominator?

We aw hiv oor fall outs BC.

quote:

Originally posted by walter pigeon:
We aw hiv oor fall outs BC.

True.

BC

Johnd and Sean
Johnd and Paul
Johnd and BlackCat
Johnd and Ectoo
Johnd and Mtoto

Such wonderful company you keep? The list tells its own story

Mtoto,
Sorry to hear your bad news. My condolences.

Now that johndolt has probably been locked away safely for the night, here is a clip from the btfr forum that may serve to confuse us even more! :


"" Changes In Weight

all turf runners Win%
108,413 carried more weight, 11,083 won 10.22%
113,231 carried less weight, 9,768 won 8.63%
index 1.19

The above table shows the results of 221,644 runners on the turf since 1993. Horses carrying more weight than their last race won 10.22%. Horses carrying less weight than their last race won 8.63%. This means a horse carrying more weight than last time is 1.19 times more likely to win than one that is carrying less.

Obviously, this is looking at all turf races and does not take into account horses going up or down in class which will have a bearing on the allocated weight.

turf runners in same class Win%
38,120 carried more weight, 3,925 won 10.30%
40,950 carried less weight, 3,630 won 8.86%
index 1.16

The figures are pretty much the same as in all races. Horses carrying more weight than in their last race, which was of the same class, won more than those carrying less.

turf runners handicap today, handicap last time Win%
55,031 carried more weight, 5,474 won 9.95%
57,085 carried less weight, 4,217 won 7.39%
index 1.35

The above table examines handicap races where the last race was a handicap too. Although the strike rates are lower, the index is bigger indicating that a horse that is rising in the weights is progressing in the right direction.

turf runners handicap today, handicap last time same class Win%
20,108 carried more weight, 2,092 won 10.40%
22,380 carried less weight, 1,658 won 7.41%
index 1.40

Weight rise handicappers running in the same class have a big advantage.

turf runners in stakes races Win%
36,323 carried more weight, 4,268 won 11.75%
39,751 carried less weight, 4,665 won 11.74%
index 1.00

Weight change in stakes races has no effect.

turf runners handicap today, stakes last time Win%
10,155 carried more weight, 1,035 won 10.19%
11,093 carried less weight, 1,412 won 12.73%
index 0.80

The above table is the only one where it is an advantage to be carrying less weight.

turf runners handicap today, handicap last time, same going Win%
6,046 carried more weight, 713 won 11.79%
6,710 carried less weight, 511 won 7.62%
index 1.5

In this table we are looking at horses running in handicaps that run on the same going as last time. As higher weighted horses win more on firm ground and less on soft ground we want to be sure that changes in going are not causing spurious results . The weight rise horses have a much bigger advantage when the going is the same.
The Handicapper

The handicapper has a tough task. He has to allocate a rating for every horse that runs. His task is to assign a rating such that all the runners in a handicap will finish in one big dead heat. This has never happened, and probably never will.

The following tables examine his performance over the years and in different race conditions. Each table shows the average winning distance that the winner beat the second placed horse. If the handicapper were to be 100% accurate the figure should be 0 as we would expect to see a dead heat.

We will look at all handicap races run on good ground only. This is to ensure the figures are not influenced by soft or firm ground.

year 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
1.7L 1.6L 1.5L 1.3L 1.4L

Over the past 5 years the average winning distance the winner beat the second horse has fallen steadily from 1.7 lengths to 1.4 lengths. This can mean one of two things. Either the quality of horses in this country are getting better, or the handicapper is becoming more accurate. We suspect the later. The handicapper is sure to be utilising the advances in technology which enable him to rate faster and more accurately. Like the world record for the 100m sprint, will the average winning distance ever reach zero?

race class A B C D E F G
1.2L 1.3L 1.4L 1.4L 1.5L 2.0L 2.0L

This table shows the average winning distances for each class of race. As the class lowers the winning distance goes up. This could indicate that it is harder for the handicapper to rate lower quality horses, or that at the best races the competition is better. Some speed rating experts say it is indeed harder to win with their ratings in the higher class races as the difference in speed points is minimal, yet in races such as sellers there is a wide difference in ratings.

race distance Sprints Middle Long
1.3L 1.4L 1.9L

The margin for error is greater in longer distances. Ratings experts use a scale to adjust ratings for different distances, e.g. 5lbs=1 length upto a mile, 5lbs=1.5 lengths a mile to 12f etc., It could be flawed.

horse age 2yo 3yo 4yo 5yo 6yo 7yo+
1.2L 1.6L 1.5L 1.4L 1.5L 1.6L

It is always thought that the handicapper underestimates the rating for 2yo's. The above table shows this is clearly not the case. It is 3yo's where the handicapper has the most trouble trying to get an accurate rating. This could be because many horses don't race at 2. The same applies with older horses. They may not have won for a couple of years and their rating may have plummeted too far.

month Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct
2.0L 1.8L 1.4L 1.4L 1.6L 1.5L 1.4L 1.3L

The early part of the season could be affected by soft going which creates bigger winning margins. But there is no evidence of this at the end of the season when it is as likely to have softer going. What we think is happening here is the all weather effect. Horses that have run just before the start of the season hold an edge over horses that have not run since last season. The situation does not settle down until May. Many punters do not bet until then because they want to wait until the form settles down. The handicapper can't do this he has to rate every race.
Other Weight Influences

Why would a trainer use a jockey that would be overweight? The trainer may be disgruntled when the handicapper raises his horse too steeply but do you see him arguing with the jockey for being a pound or two overweight? We have always suspected that trainers like to run their horses overweight to disguise form. If the horse runs badly his rating should go down. He can then drop in class (and rise in absolute weight) and enjoy the extra pound or two gain from not being overweight.

The following table shows the average distance behind the winner of horses carrying overweight.
overweight 0lbs 1lb 2lbs 3lbs 4lbs 5lbs 6lbs 7lbs 8lbs 9lbs+
11.1L 13.0L 14.9L 15.5L 15.5L 16.0L 16.7L 17.2L 21.2L 21.5L

It is clear the more overweight a jockey is the bigger distance it will lose by.

penalty 0lbs 1-4lbs 5lbs 6lbs 7lbs+
11.3L 9.0L 7.2L 6.1L 5.6L

It sure is an advantage for a trainer to turn out his recent winner quickly before the rating is reassessed. The bigger the penalty the closer the horse is to the winner.

allowance 0lbs 3lbs 4lbs 5lbs 6lbs 7lbs 8lbs 10lbs
11.0L 12.2L 14.8L 11.7L 12.3 12.3L 8.5L 10.3L

Overall apprentices are a bad thing. In standard races the only allowances claimed are 3, 5 and 7lbs. Each of these riders lose a 1.2, 0.7, 1.3 lengths more respectively than a professional.

We are not saying you should avoid apprentices. You need to spot the best races for them, and you need to catch them when they are 'riding the wave'. This is where they have outclassed their allowance band and are close to dropping down a level e.g. from a 5lb to a 3lb claimer.

Note that 4, 6, 8, 10lbs are allowances in Apprentice only races. The apprentices that are claiming 8 and 10lbs (for having only won a few or no races) are good value for their claim.
Summary

We don't wish to go into the fundamentals of speed ratings here. Suffice to say that it is an uphill struggle trying to compile them on British turf courses due to the differences in track layout, directions, speeds etc. Only the all weather offers the best chance of mastering them. What is clear is that increasing weight on a horse is not a disadvantage - it won't slow a horse down, and decreasing a horses weight won't speed it up. Weight risers will mostly beat weight fallers.

The handicapper is becoming more accurate as the years go by. This is going to make it harder for us to win in handicap races. If you listen to some professionals they say never to bet in handicaps.

You should have a closer look at penalty carriers. Don't be put off by the weight rise - the bigger the penalty, the closer the horse will be to winners enclosure. Overweight horses should be avoided but taken note of incase the trainer is using the race to disguise form ""


-----

On the other hand, there may be the odd snippet that is helpful.

I'll read that post later Sean, cheers

Mtoto
Sorry to hear about your personal circs at the moment, all the best.



nearly forgot

JohnD

1/30

-24.5pts

Les

quote:

george does this make major cadereaux a virtual certainty although 5th in the ability rating

I have now looked at the race and will post on the separate thread that has been opened. But the short answer to your question is, in my view, no.