consistency « Thread Started on Jan 27, 2009, 9:52pm »
half a lengtrh per furlong last 3 starts to see if the horse was in it at the right end,then average racing post rating from last 3 races a good enough base to check consistency?
Re: consistency « Reply #1 on Jan 28, 2009, 12:05am »
consistency has to be related to the chance of winning the horse had in the race
for example
last 3 form figures
222
in each race the horse was beaten half a length
is this consistent?
if the horse was an even money shot in each race I believe he is consistently poor...but if he is 16/1 in each of those runs I would say he is consistently good
Re: consistency « Reply #3 on Jan 28, 2009, 9:26am »
so a 3rd best winner would be thought a better winnner than the fav,is this the strange way vdw thought of form some speak off,at the outset of a race he would expect them to finnish in betting order,and note any horse who was at a bigger price that was in among the more fancied horses,and any fav not in it at the finnish was considered out of form
Re: consistency « Reply #4 on Jan 28, 2009, 10:19am »
Les
That is an interesting idea, and for some while I thought that (in a slightly modified form) was how Lee worked. The idea being that a horse which finished in, or better than, its market position was a form horse in respect of that run, and one which finished in a poorer position than its market position was not a form horse.
However, although it works with many of Van der Wheil's selections (not surprising, as many were winners last time out), it doesn't work with them all, including at least one of his "certainties" (Three Tails), and it doesn't work with all Lee's (Amarna, Double Vodka, etc).
Re: consistency « Reply #7 on Jan 28, 2009, 11:06am »
if you add its bookie percentage to its form figure percentage ,say form figs 111 = 33% and 1/1= 50% and the horse did not win you could say it was not good form no?
if you add its bookie percentage to its form figure percentage ,say form figs 111 = 33% and 1/1= 50% and the horse did not win you could say it was not good form no?
Hi Les
The Braashee example may explain.
VDW selected Braashee as a bet in the Ascot race 30/09/89
Lets look at the LTO race for Braashee
Brashee (7/1) beat Cossack Gaurd (11/1) by a neck. Both Carried 9st-5lbs Now looking at the odds you may say that CG was the better performance, but this would be wrong.
They next met again in the Ascot race (30/09/89)
This time Braashee carried 9st-4 and again beat Cossack Guard 8st-11 by a much bigger margin.
So why did Braashee win, after all he was carrying 7lbs more for only a neck beating yet improved.
If you look back to the 2nd LTo race for both runners you will see that it was a poor performance by Cossack Guard when beaten by Braashee.
Cossack Guard coming out of class 693 Brashee coming out of Class 25
Also note the finsh of the Newbury Race.
Cossack Gaurd was leading 3 furlongs out and was passed by Braashee 1f out. To pass Cossack Gaurd Braashee had to make headway from 2 furlongs out and this meant that over the final 2furlongs he was travelling faster than CG and still only needed to be pushed out, indicating that he had more in the tank.
If you look at the type of horse that VDW was indicating as bets, they all had one thing in common and that was Guts and Stamina. i.e they wanted to be winners.
Re: consistency « Reply #9 on Jan 28, 2009, 12:33pm »
Les wrote was it not what was part of the olga lillian system?
Have the rules of this system ever been made public, either on the internet or in a publication of any sort? I know that Tony Peach wrote about it in one of his booklets but that is the only time I have seen it referred to.
I remember VDW wrote.....''most important, how each horse performed in the latter stages of each race'' I think in The Golden Years.
Hi Chilled
I think the Brashee example also explains how to balance Class & Form. it also explains why VDW suggested that unadjusted Speed Ratings were useful. If you adopt the normal adjusted figures then CG would have been rated 7lbs superior based on their last race.
if you add its bookie percentage to its form figure percentage ,say form figs 111 = 33% and 1/1= 50% and the horse did not win you could say it was not good form no?
Hi Les
The Braashee example may explain.
VDW selected Braashee as a bet in the Ascot race 30/09/89
Lets look at the LTO race for Braashee
Brashee (7/1) beat Cossack Gaurd (11/1) by a neck. Both Carried 9st-5lbs Now looking at the odds you may say that CG was the better performance, but this would be wrong.
They next met again in the Ascot race (30/09/89)
This time Braashee carried 9st-4 and again beat Cossack Guard 8st-11 by a much bigger margin.
So why did Braashee win, after all he was carrying 7lbs more for only a neck beating yet improved.
If you look back to the 2nd LTo race for both runners you will see that it was a poor performance by Cossack Guard when beaten by Braashee.
Cossack Guard coming out of class 693 Brashee coming out of Class 25
Also note the finsh of the Newbury Race.
Cossack Gaurd was leading 3 furlongs out and was passed by Braashee 1f out. To pass Cossack Gaurd Braashee had to make headway from 2 furlongs out and this meant that over the final 2furlongs he was travelling faster than CG and still only needed to be pushed out, indicating that he had more in the tank.
If you look at the type of horse that VDW was indicating as bets, they all had one thing in common and that was Guts and Stamina. i.e they wanted to be winners.
Good Luck
Monster
thats a fascinating post Monster..in which you highlight one of the main flaws in using a one race example as gospel...which is a main flaw in using just 20 examples out of thousands and thousands of races.
lets look at facts here..the betting forecast is the one most accurately predictive tool we have..you run each price range through any database and you will see that they win just as often as the odds predict
yes in your example..one horse beat another horse again..but over a series of races ...horses that consistently fail at short prices are donkeys and are not consistenet at all.
lets take it to the extreme shall we?
Michael Johnston runs against me and 6 other no hopers at 200 metres..I think you could say that he wins 3 out of three..yes?...the bookies would price him at 1/10,000 on..only a heart attack stops him winning.
he in fact comes 2nd in every race..do you still think him consistent????
my take on it would be that he is in fact very inconsistent due to the fact he should have WON every time...by quite some margin
but VDW would have you believe on bare figures that he was a 6 rating on consistency ...which in VDW's method..is consistent..yeah right.
still think a horse's consistency is not connected to his actual chance of winning??
Re: consistency « Reply #15 on Jan 29, 2009, 12:06am »
Hi EC
I am not sure what your point is regarding consistency linked to odds. But lets take Roushayd 3LTO run 5/1, (Beaten 4lengths) 2nd Lto Run 10/1 (Beaten 3 lengths) & 3rd LTO Run 12/1, (Beaten 9.5 lengths)
The 10 year SP against expected can be seen at my Google Doc Link.
OK so we have our SP odds against expected. Some Trainers are overbet or underbet. For example last season lets look at the Odds Band = 2/1-11/4 M Johnston =22.8%, Tom Dascombe= 45% Strike rate & M Channon 35% & (47% in Handicaps ) All were in the same SP band. Johnsons Runners are overbet and the two other Trainers are underbet.
There are many unusual aspects to some of VDW's bets.
Pipstead in the ONC LTO race Class 113 SP 10/1 won Split Second rating 65
Gorgeous Strike also in the ONC LTO class 192 SP 6/1 won Split Second rating 79
Clearly to seperate these two there is more going on than SP, Class and speed rating. Capability and Form are at least two aspects that need to be balanced.
Yes there are some interesting links to SP with VDW and for starters.
Righthand Man LTO won Fav, the horse who came 2nd Why Forget LTO was dropping in class against Righthand Man Won and was Favourite in that race
Beau Ranger LTO Won the horse who came second Classified LTO had won and was 6/4 Favourite in that race
Wing And A Prayer LTO won the horse who came 2nd Free Flow was dropping in class against Wing And A Payer and hadbeen Favourite in that race.
Cool Gin LTO won LTO the horse who came 2nd Hello Killeny was Dropping in Class against Cool Gin and had been Favourite in his LTO race
Stray Shot 2nd LTO the horse who won Warner For Leisure was Favourite in his LTO race
Zamadra won LTO and was Favourite the horse who came 2nd Antiguan Moon had been in the same race has Zamandra in his LTO race in which Zamandra came 2nd to Jockamel who was dropping in class and was Favourite
OK lets get to Roushayd.
Roushayd beaten by Billet. In his LTO race Billet won and was Favourite in that race
Next Braashee
Braashee won LTO the horse who came 3rd to Braashee & Cossack Gaurd was Shoot ahead who had won LTO and was Favourite
Finally Pipstead
Pipstead won LTO the horse who came 3rd Kribensis had won LTO 2nd fav and had the fav in 2nd place
If you are into Sp
The LR figure is not a VDW thing but it is worth keeping in mind. price ratio =sp/number of runners 12/1 and 9 runers= LTO Price Ratio of 1.33
some data from Peter May's book...
LR = 0 to .25 .....roI -18% STRIKE RATE 12% LR=2.01 to 2.5 roi -42% sr 5%
Re: consistency « Reply #16 on Jan 29, 2009, 1:01am »
If one believes in the efficacy of consistency then presumably one believes that a horse always tries to run to its full capability.
In hcps at least I believe that would be a mistake.
I can understand that consistency is admirable in underexposed 2 and 3yos as in G1 and 2 horses but in the vast majority of racing it would remove much of the art of 'placing' a horse both in winning and in losing.
Handicappers are not necessarily placed just at wrong distances or goings for them to lose, on the contrary they are often apparently perfectly placed but do not 'show'. This anti-consistency can be just as admirable in handicappers as its virtuous opposite is in the lightly raced and/or the top non-handicappers, because it is the best way to set up an opposition for a knock out blow that can be exploited profitably.
In the end it is class that wins the race not consistency, because without the former you need luck and the latter can not help if you are not good enough.
Re: consistency « Reply #18 on Jan 29, 2009, 1:25am »
HI Jib
I very much agree with you regarding Handicaps.
Trainers will usually be aware from a key race that his runner is returning to form and will then condition the horse to be eventually placed to win. M Channon did this with Ajigolo. After a lay off returned 20/01/07and performed well. Was then given the run around and when everything was right was placed to win. SP was 12/1, 14/1, 12/1 and was backed into 9/2 from 7/1 when he won.
Re: consistency « Reply #19 on Jan 29, 2009, 11:28am »
Monster,
Mick Channon is one of the trainers who most frustrates me. I seldom manage to second guess him because he runs his horses more than any other trainer so that even when I know he's going to pull a stunt with one of them it gets expensive waiting for it to happen.
I am of the opinion that handicapping is a specialized career in racing and the 'key race' principal you mention is fundamental in being able to evaluate what is at first appearance a complex puzzle.
Re: consistency « Reply #21 on Jan 29, 2009, 1:24pm »
Boozer,
For me a horse's key race is where I believe he showed his best ability.
I work with a formula which I think you must be familiar with now:
Finishing dist in lengths x 15 / Race dist in furlongs = lbs in class
So I look for a horse's best performance amongst his races using this calculation providing the race it comes from is neither a small field nor a slow time.
If the horse is exposed then I believe that that class is the best it is capable of, if unexposed I am prepared to allow it to do better.
Yesterday I put up the unexposed L'Hirondelle because his key race had been his last run where by my formula I had his performance rated 12lbs above the class of yesterdays opposition, so even without the likely improvement one of the opposition would have needed to perform a huge leap career best to get at him.
As he won by 3.5ls I think I was right to regard him as a good thing.
« Last Edit: Jan 29, 2009, 1:29pm by johninbrasil »
if you add its bookie percentage to its form figure percentage ,say form figs 111 = 33% and 1/1= 50% and the horse did not win you could say it was not good form no?
Hi Les
The Braashee example may explain.
VDW selected Braashee as a bet in the Ascot race 30/09/89
Lets look at the LTO race for Braashee
Brashee (7/1) beat Cossack Gaurd (11/1) by a neck. Both Carried 9st-5lbs Now looking at the odds you may say that CG was the better performance, but this would be wrong.
They next met again in the Ascot race (30/09/89)
This time Braashee carried 9st-4 and again beat Cossack Guard 8st-11 by a much bigger margin.
So why did Braashee win, after all he was carrying 7lbs more for only a neck beating yet improved.
If you look back to the 2nd LTo race for both runners you will see that it was a poor performance by Cossack Guard when beaten by Braashee.
Cossack Guard coming out of class 693 Brashee coming out of Class 25
Also note the finsh of the Newbury Race.
Cossack Gaurd was leading 3 furlongs out and was passed by Braashee 1f out. To pass Cossack Gaurd Braashee had to make headway from 2 furlongs out and this meant that over the final 2furlongs he was travelling faster than CG and still only needed to be pushed out, indicating that he had more in the tank.
If you look at the type of horse that VDW was indicating as bets, they all had one thing in common and that was Guts and Stamina. i.e they wanted to be winners.
Good Luck
Monster
Monster
With respect, you are making the mistake so many have made before you in assuming that the solution to this race is in 'form cycles'. While Braashee was unquestionably improving, it is a mistake to assume that Cossack Guard was on a downward spiral, as his form clearly shows. Winless as a 2yo, he showed improvement in each of his races as a 3yo, rising in class each race until dropped in class to win his maiden - again showing improvement. He then ran in the Ebor, and though showing a slight downturn in his rating , that would have been excusable in much his highest class race of the season, and from the worst draw in the 19 runner field. On then to Newbury, where beaten 1/4l by Braashee, but again showing improvement, recording his highest ever RPR, and 2nd highest ever s/f. Not once in his 3yo career did he show any actual regression until his 2nd meeting with Braashee - in fact, entirely the opposite - he improved with every race, and went into the Ascot handicap in the form of his life, and 7lb better in with his previous conqueror, and anyone that tells you differently is engineering his form to make it fit their understanding, (Not surprising really, as they have also made the same mistake with Roushayd, Baronet, and a host of others - no doubt inheriting their approach from Guest and his acolytes). There is a way to understand the 7l discrepancy in their subsequent form, unlike the above simple, logical and reasonable, and fits entirely with how VDW said we should read forrm; I'm not about to reveal it on an open forum, particularly one with so many members who'd rather discuss these matters in secret, but, in all sincerity, I assure you it is there - and it explains all the others too.
Joined: Jan 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 5,628 Location: Scotland
Re: consistency « Reply #23 on Jan 29, 2009, 1:43pm »
The trouble with rating methods is that they can be a bit hit & miss how many times have we had horses well clear - however we rate - only to see them run down the field?.There must be a reason why some of the good thing`s win and some dont?.
Re: consistency « Reply #24 on Jan 29, 2009, 2:04pm »
Hi Jonhd
Re "If you look back to the 2nd LTo race for both runners you will see that it was a poor performance by Cossack Guard when beaten by Braashee.
Cossack Guard coming out of class 693 Brashee coming out of Class 25"
I stand by my opinion that VDW viewed CG's Newbury performance as a downturn in Form. Dropping from Class 693 to class 204 and beaten by a horse who was coming out of much lower class. Add to that CG was travelling slower than Braashee in the Final 2f Stage of the race (Speed/Stamina) and then onto Ascot which would be more testing than the Newbury Track, then you have your answer why Braashee finished in front by a wider margin in their next meeting, despite being 7lbs worse off.
I hardly think that 13.5 round Newbury is less of a stamina test than 12 round Ascot?
Hi JohnD
If thats what you think then I wish you well.
Newbury is Lefthanded Gallopping and Ascot is Right Handed, Galloping and Stiff.
At Newbury CG can bowl along, striding at a steady pace. The nature of Ascot is totally different, they start off at vitually the highest point in 12f races and then decend down towards the lowest point, Swinley Bottom at which point after rounding the bend, they start to climb and continue to climb up to the finishing post.
The pace is never steady and you will see pace injected at various points in 12f races over this course, quite often as they round Swinley Bottom.
Re: consistency « Reply #27 on Jan 29, 2009, 3:50pm »
Monster
Newbury is the 2nd longest flat-racing circuit in the country and, with its wide, sweeping bends and minor undulations doing little to break up the pace, it is the most galloping of all the flat racing tracks. Ascot's circuit is smaller, undulating, and has a sharp bend at Swinley Bottom, an even sharper one on the turn in, and one of the shortest finishing straights in racing, all of which serve to ensure there can be no flat-out all-the-way gallop. Even ignoring all that, and the fact that both races were run at a good pace, it would be foolish to ignore the Newbury race was over a full 1.5 furlongs further.
Joined: Jan 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 5,628 Location: Scotland
Re: consistency « Reply #29 on Jan 29, 2009, 5:47pm »
Jib wrote: Handicappers are not necessarily placed just at wrong distances or goings for them to lose, on the contrary they are often apparently perfectly placed but do not 'show'. This anti-consistency can be just as admirable in handicappers as its virtuous opposite is in the lightly raced and/or the top non-handicappers, because it is the best way to set up an opposition for a knock out blow that can be exploited profitably. ...........................................................................................
We spoke of Councellor earlier on Gummy before he won either of his recent races we were both sure he was being readied with a win being iminent which of course he did winning twice at 7/1 & 6/1.Have to say both times he won i made the races tougher than the prep behind Nightjar at Southwell where he finished 3rd. Do you have any view on how things worked out and did you catch him at all?.
![[Home]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/menu/home.gif)
![[Help]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/menu/help.gif)
![[Search]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/menu/search.gif)
![[Members]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/menu/members.gif)
![[Admin]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/menu/admin.gif)
![[Profile]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/menu/profile.gif)
![[Logout]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/menu/logout.gif)
![[Search This Thread]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/search2.gif)
![[Add Bookmark]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/buttons/bookmark.gif)
![[Reply]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/buttons/reply.gif)
![[Send Topic To Friend]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/buttons/sendtopic.gif)
![[Print]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/buttons/print.gif)
Author
![[avatar]](http://blackcat-racing.co.uk/avatars/RussellGrant.jpg)
![[send pm]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/buttons/message_sm.gif)
![[Quote]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/buttons/quote.gif)
![[Modify]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/buttons/modify.gif)
![[Delete]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/buttons/delete.gif)
92.4.100.213
...which in VDW's method..is consistent..yeah right.![[avatar]](http://blackcat-racing.co.uk/avatars/feet2.jpg){kind=small}
![[avatar]](http://blackcat-racing.co.uk/avatars/beer.gif)
![[avatar]](http://blackcat-racing.co.uk/avatars/KennethMore.jpg)
![[image]](http://blackcat-racing.co.uk/avatars/star.png)
2009 Tipping Challenge Winner 11,449.71 pts profit.... 10 months played. 
![[Move Topic]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/buttons/movetopic.gif)
![[Remove Topic]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/buttons/removetopic.gif)
![[Unlock Topic]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/buttons/unlock.gif)
![[Sticky Topic]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/buttons/sticky.gif)
![[Make Announcement]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/buttons/makeannouncement.gif)
![[Bump Topic]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/buttons/bump.gif)