mark eaton racing site.
« What Is the Second Numerical picture »

Hey, BC, you have 50 messages, 0 are new.
Apr 2, 2010, 8:49pm

[Home] [Help] [Search] [Members] [Admin] [Profile] [Logout]



mark eaton racing site. :: Main :: Van Der Wheil :: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Page 2 of 10 » Jump to page   Go    [Search This Thread] [Add Bookmark][Reply] [Send Topic To Friend] [Print]
AuthorTopic: What Is the Second Numerical picture (Read 4,804 times)
mtoto
Junior Member
**
member is offline




[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 59
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #30 on Jan 28, 2009, 8:08pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
I have WFL on 6, would it be be because of the distance?

Chilled,

I can see WFL being eliminated when reading the form. However numerical pictures suggest to me this is before the form is studied. VDW does say check the form to make sure the figures make sense.

I notice only the * consistent horses have the ability figure. I always thought you rated the whole field.

True the ability ratings are not shown for some horses. This also raises the question would Pegwell Bay be the selection if the instructions (guide lines, call them what you will) in SIAO. PG is only 5th rated on ability so he would have been eliminated


Be Lucky
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 82.46.101.166
johnd
Senior Member
****
member is offline




[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 263
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #31 on Jan 28, 2009, 8:40pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
Mtoto

I could be mistaken but my records show WFL with a c/r of 6

You're right, of course (must change these specs). Without digging out old form books, I'd suggest he forgave BY his 'P', but not WFL?
Regarding the 2nd numerical picture, it applys to both Pegwell Bay and Prominent King, but it's a matter of evaluation (providing you read what was said) rather than arithmetic.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 78.144.81.235
Arkle55
God
*****
member is offline

[avatar]


[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 621
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #32 on Jan 28, 2009, 8:42pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
MTOTO
Would you like to know the answers to the questions surrounding Pegwell Bay, or are you not that bothered either way
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 82.3.124.203
mtoto
Junior Member
**
member is offline




[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 59
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #33 on Jan 28, 2009, 10:01pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
However if as seems to be the case he wasnt all that he claimed to be Perhaps he wasnt as honest as he should have been with some of his examples.

Boozer,

While I can agree the ideas weren't explained accurately/fully, for me that doesn't automatically point the finger at VDW. In all fairness who benefited most by making the whole thing mysterious and vague. I can't find anywhere VDW said he personally used the ability rating (as explained). He said it was a quick easy method to judge ability. He also said he would never explain his "other" rating(s). Folk are trying to solve these puzzles, and I don't see how they think they can until they can find a VDW type rating that puts BL; well out of it.

***********
Regarding the 2nd numerical picture, it applys to both Pegwell Bay and Prominent King, but it's a matter of evaluation (providing you read what was said) rather than arithmetic.

JohnD,

Are you saying the 2nd numerical picture isn't numerical?? If so why call it the 2nd n/picture?

****
Would you like to know the answers to the questions surrounding Pegwell Bay, or are you not that bothered either way

A55,

I'm always interested in any theory that helps solve the VDW puzzles.

I'm also happy that WFL would have been eliminated when the form was studied. Using my interpretation of the probables formula I can remove WFL before the evaluation stage. What I can't do is stop him being a consistent horse. So are the probables found, BEFORE the consistent horses are found? If so that doesn't make sense to me. So are these numerical pictures really numerical? I'm happy the first one is, but is the first on really the first or the 2nd?

Be Lucky
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 82.46.101.166
longshot
New Member
*
member is offline

[avatar]

Superman


[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 21
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #34 on Jan 28, 2009, 10:08pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
Happy Birthday Boozer!! ;D
« Last Edit: Jan 28, 2009, 10:10pm by longshot »Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 81.154.245.139
Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No, it's me.
boozer
New Member
*
member is offline

[avatar]


[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 28
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #35 on Jan 28, 2009, 10:26pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
Thank you Longshot

It took a while to twig how Mtoto new (He couldnt have that good a memory)

:)
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 88.104.41.69
johnd
Senior Member
****
member is offline




[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 263
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #36 on Jan 28, 2009, 10:34pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
Mtoto

"The class is the first piece of information required about a horse's previous runs and, just as in the first part of the method it is better visually assimilated by simplifying."

He then begins the next para: "Class needs to be related to performance, so it isn't just a case of a set of rules" which, although phrased differently, is precisely the same approach as in SIAO.
« Last Edit: Jan 28, 2009, 10:36pm by johnd »Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 78.150.225.126
ec
Full Member
***
member is offline




[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 187
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #37 on Jan 28, 2009, 10:52pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
according to VDW a horse that is the best in the race..class wise ...always wins.. if he has been "consistent" before the race. his view of consistency was adding the last last 3 form figures together..irrlevant of if those form figures actually meant anything

anyone else think this an oversimplified way of looking at horse racing?

Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 86.128.63.231
georgejohns
Full Member
***
member is offline




[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 101
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #38 on Jan 28, 2009, 11:00pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
EC

"according to VDW a horse that is the best in the race..class wise ...always wins"

Nowhere does Van der Wheil say that, or anything like that.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 82.69.9.100
ec
Full Member
***
member is offline




[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 187
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #39 on Jan 28, 2009, 11:11pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
racing certainty??

you also took my point out of context by missing out the consistent bit
« Last Edit: Jan 28, 2009, 11:12pm by ec »Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 86.128.63.231
Mark Eaton Administrator
Administrator
*****
Admin
member is offline

[avatar]


[homepage] [send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 528
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #40 on Jan 28, 2009, 11:53pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]

Jan 28, 2009, 10:52pm, ec wrote:
his view of consistency was adding the last last 3 form figures together..irrlevant of if those form figures actually meant anything


I would agree with you that JUST adding the form figures together would be an oversimplified view of horseracing. However...

TGY page 43:

"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 latter stages of each race".

BC
« Last Edit: Jan 28, 2009, 11:54pm by Mark Eaton Administrator »Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
Mark Eaton.
georgejohns
Full Member
***
member is offline




[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 101
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #41 on Jan 29, 2009, 12:12am »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
EC

Add back in your phrase re consistency and Van der Wheil still didn't say that or anything like it.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 82.69.9.100
Bold Gait
New Member
*
member is offline

[avatar]


[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 29
Location: Leeds
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #42 on Jan 29, 2009, 12:46am »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
Chilled

My apologies for not replying as I forgot the thread where I posted. The Ahoy list was a list of horses from a booklet called 'Systematic betting' I was looking at these in depth and by chance or whatever I found certain traits that in fact run through every other horse mentioned in the booklet that I have looked at so far.
You need the 1987 and 88 form books but it is money well spent especially as the information gleaned is very useful!! :o
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 79.64.182.31
jonto
New Member
*
member is offline




[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 4
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #43 on Jan 29, 2009, 11:41am »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
BC
In my copy of Betting The VDW Way, the top of page 12 begins: WELSH OAK: Won first time out....
I can find no trace of the phrase you refer to.

In any case, i suspect he was referring to the calculation of the Consistent Form aggregrate.

Usually, it is only necessary to consider the last 3 runs but there are instances where it seems sensible that we look a bit further back.

For example; a horse might have the figures 3822 for its last 4 runs but, on examination, the 8 was at Southwell on Equitrack and the other 3 on AW courses which have Polytrack.
A glance at the horse's form then shows that it does not run well at Southwell.

All the best.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 79.76.12.135
Arkle55
God
*****
member is offline

[avatar]


[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 621
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #44 on Jan 29, 2009, 12:21pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
JONTO
Is it really that easy.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 82.3.124.203
Mark Eaton Administrator
Administrator
*****
Admin
member is offline

[avatar]


[homepage] [send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 528
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #45 on Jan 29, 2009, 12:57pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]

Jan 29, 2009, 11:41am, jonto wrote:
BC
In my copy of Betting The VDW Way, the top of page 12 begins: WELSH OAK: Won first time out....
I can find no trace of the phrase you refer to.



Must be a different edition :-/ it is 5 paragraphs before the "MACKESON GOLD CUP HANDICAP CHASE" heading, which will be roughly two pages before the "WELSH OAK: won first time out" paragraph.

Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
Mark Eaton.
Walter Pidgeon
God
*****
member is offline

[avatar]


[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,628
Location: Scotland
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #46 on Jan 29, 2009, 1:00pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
I remember reading a vander wheely boy years ago who used to forgive runs in a horses recent form if there was viable enough reason for doing so.He made no apoligies for it either - a horses consistency figs were transformed the way this boy worked.I suppose it`s a case of how far you go with it?.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 195.93.21.34
[image] 2009 Tipping Challenge Winner 11,449.71 pts profit.... 10 months played.
Arkle55
God
*****
member is offline

[avatar]


[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 621
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #47 on Jan 29, 2009, 1:29pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
Walter
The only way i can see how you can forgive a horse a poor run is if it is whacked right up in class big time, all this dont like the track , dont like the ground w'ont get the distance etc.Yes a trainer has to find out what a horse preference is but at the same time you do not purposely risk injury to a horse by running with conditions against.Take Apocalozzo 3.20 Folkstone a couple of days ago, if i remember correctly up in distance , weight ,offical rating, ground was a bog. Yes it was'nt a good race but on the face of it before the race that horse was getting slaughtered in all directions but still managed a second place.But what does that tell you apart from one fact, that it was better than every other horse bar one on the day.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 82.3.124.203
Walter Pidgeon
God
*****
member is offline

[avatar]


[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,628
Location: Scotland
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #48 on Jan 29, 2009, 3:12pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
I remember the horse in question was most backed prior to the race on betfair arkle despite all the negatives.It depends how you look at things i agree a trainer needs to find out about a horse but horses i look at for example have already gone through that stage and are for the most part experienced handicappers.
One way i tend to pick up on horses is if i rate a race and have one highly rated which is short in the market that puts in a stinker.There will be horses who finished in front of him/her which perhaps should`nt have and the (facts) if taken at face value can skew workings further down the line.Take the winner of the race Alderbrook Girl won 11/2 backed from 10`s (btn fav) at Towcester lto faded up the hill where she may have been highly rated (did`nt rate) previously ran well at Folkestone fin 2nd in similar class.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 195.93.21.34
[image] 2009 Tipping Challenge Winner 11,449.71 pts profit.... 10 months played.
mtoto
Junior Member
**
member is offline




[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 59
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #49 on Jan 29, 2009, 5:53pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
JohnD,

I'm trying to work out WHY he used the term numerical picture if as you say there is more to the "pictures" than just numbers.

Reading the following to me at least it quite clear these pictures are arrived at before ANY form has been studied............."To confirm what the figures say (numerical picture), it is necessary to study the form of all concerned, taking particular note of class, etc.

Some criticize these discussions saying they are pointless just going round in circles. I have never agreed as there is always something new to learn or notice. Have to say I thought George J made a mistake when he said the probables are arrived at BEFORE form was taken into account. However because of this discussion I have now noticed the following.........Many create the initial numerical picture and say they are stuck and don't know how to select from the three probables.

That reads to me the probables are found before the form is studied. This has to change my slant on the ideas. Until now I didn't think finding the probables was that important, but now I can see a horse has to be a probable. It can't really be a selection if it isn't, while it does raise the question does a horse have to be consistent to be a probable? What does a horse need to be a probable, as there are a couple that fail on consistency?

Be Lucky
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 82.46.101.166
johnd
Senior Member
****
member is offline




[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 263
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #50 on Jan 29, 2009, 6:13pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]

My view is that he used the first numerical picture to isolate the probables (Not forgetting highly consistent horses that weren't in first 5/6 in betting), and the second NP was part of the analysis of the form.
Unlike you, I see little purpose in continually covering old ground, (It bores the t*ts off me) it may be helpful to newcomers but, other than that, I think everyone's best interests would be served by 'real-time' analysis of contemporary races.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 78.146.132.113
boozer
New Member
*
member is offline

[avatar]


[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 28
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #51 on Jan 29, 2009, 6:20pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
That looks about right JD
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 88.104.11.103
Mark Eaton Administrator
Administrator
*****
Admin
member is offline

[avatar]


[homepage] [send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 528
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #52 on Jan 29, 2009, 6:31pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]

Jan 29, 2009, 6:13pm, johnd wrote:
My view is that he used the first numerical picture to isolate the probables (Not forgetting highly consistent horses that weren't in first 5/6 in betting), and the second NP was part of the analysis of the form.


For what it's worth, I agree with that. ;)


Jan 29, 2009, 6:13pm, johnd wrote:
I see little purpose in continually covering old ground...


Perhaps leave that for others then? :-X


Jan 29, 2009, 6:13pm, johnd wrote:
I think everyone's best interests would be served by 'real-time' analysis of contemporary races.


I'd also agree with that, and I know you already do. ;D

No harm is done by those that wish to discuss old examples in doing so. If folks are happy doing that, then great. It's an interesting read for some others too!!
« Last Edit: Jan 29, 2009, 6:39pm by Mark Eaton Administrator »Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
Mark Eaton.
georgejohns
Full Member
***
member is offline




[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 101
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #53 on Jan 29, 2009, 6:58pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
Mtoto

"while it does raise the question does a horse have to be consistent to be a probable?"

Van der Wheil showed several ways of identifying probables, for example that using the Sporting Chronicle selection box, but if we are talking about the way he worked with what I think of as the main method (as outlined in the March 1981 article), the answer is yes, most assuredly.

The probables device is best thought of as a means of reducing the list of consistent horses where there are more than three (if only three, they are automatically probables) before one moves on to assessing form etc. The device doesn't always get one down to three (had Decent Fellow's probables figure been 5 it wouldn't have helped in the case of the 1978 Erin), but it often helps.

It follows from the above that before one applies the probables device, one needs to be confident one has identified the consistent horses properly. The discussion between you and Johnd in respect of the Pegwell Bay selection suggests that even those who have been interested in Van der Wheil for some while have difficulties with that in some cases. The Pegwell Bay example is a little misleading, because in copying the original to "Betting the VDW Way" Mr Peach or his type-setter added an erroneous * in the "consistent" column for Gee-A. There were six, not seven, consistent horses in the Pegwell Bay race, and anyone concerned about probables needs to be sure he or she understands exactly why there were the six. If one gets the consistent horses wrong, and then applies the probables device, there is obviously a fair chance one won't identify the same probables as Van der Wheil would have done.


Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 82.69.9.100
mtoto
Junior Member
**
member is offline




[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 59
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #54 on Jan 29, 2009, 7:33pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
and the second NP was part of the analysis of the form.

Why then is it call numerical??? ??? reading and analyzing form has nothing to do with numbers

I'm more than happy with the way I make my selections. The reason I'm on this forum is to find out how VDW worked not to join in a tipping contest, there is already a thread for that. To be honest it doesn't interest me in the slightest, any more than reading other folks tip in a paper.

Selections BASED on VDW do, as long as the contributor is prepared to answer questions on said analysis otherwise it is just a tipping thread.

George,

Can I ask what do you see as the 2nd numerical picture, and what importance do you think it plays?

Be Lucky
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 82.46.101.166
georgejohns
Full Member
***
member is offline




[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 101
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #55 on Jan 29, 2009, 7:58pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
Mtoto

I don't really have anything to add to my post on page 2 of this thread. The essence of Van der Wheil's main method is clearly eliminating all but one of the field to isolate the class/form horse and then assessing the probability of the class/form horse winning. What is of note is the means he employed to achieve those two goals, the discovery of which is the puzzle he has in effect set us. Provided we use the same means, it doesn't seem to me to be important how many numerical pictures one uses to get there.

As pointed out in my post on page 2, I sort out the form of the probables on the 3rd sheet of my Excel workbook, so one could say in the third numerical picture (the probables stage being my second). And contrary to your view that "reading and analysing form has nothing to do with numbers", apart from the names of the probables in column a of the sheet, all the other data are numbers, except for the yeses and noes needed to apply one of the rating methods to which Van der Wheil referred in the Prominent King letter.

That of course is not to say that everything can always be expressed in numbers - occasionally (as Van der Wheil explained with Pegwell Bay and Wayward Lad) one or more factors not readily expressed numerically are pertinent, and can be decisive.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 82.69.9.100
boozer
New Member
*
member is offline

[avatar]


[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 28
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #56 on Jan 29, 2009, 8:33pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
Mtoto Said
Why then is it call numerical??? reading and analyzing form has nothing to do with numbers

The Horses previous races have values in prizemoney competed for VDW,s so called Class ratings
Horses that run in those races have values of other previous races that they competed for
Class ratings
One could make a science out of it
Class is no good without form
Form is what they did class is the level the form was acheived

Cmon Mtoto its all numbers
Speed figures are numeric








Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 88.104.11.103
mtoto
Junior Member
**
member is offline




[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 59
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #57 on Jan 29, 2009, 9:58pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
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.

George/Boozer,

Put numbers against most of the requirements listed above. as NONE of the numbers you have to date MEASURE form. Yes, SOME aspects of form can be measured by numbers, but certainly not ALL. Isn't he saying form needs to be studied to confirm the numbers already arrived at? Numbers by themselves are not enough!!!!

Be Lucky
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 82.46.101.166
georgejohns
Full Member
***
member is offline




[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 101
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #58 on Jan 29, 2009, 10:18pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
Mtoto

I think it is clear that the phrase "to confirm what the figures say" relates to the picture that emerges from the consistency/ability dimensions presented in the table above the passage you've quoted. What one is then advised to do is study the form in the light of that picture, with several dimensions mentioned.

Not all those dimensions can be readily be expressed in numbers (hence the reference to Pegwell Bay and Wayward Lad in my previous post). But the task here is to work out what for Van der Wheil were the important dimensions (he of course told us which was the most important), and how they interact with one another. My research suggests that the numerics (especially how the horse performed in the later stages of each race) are in 95% of cases overwhelmingly the main dimensions, with the considerations which are not readily expressed numerically, such as going and distance (Pegwell Bay) and course (Wayward Lad) only rarely overturning the conclusions one reaches from the numerics.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 82.69.9.100
horseplayer
New Member
*
member is offline




[send pm]

Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 1
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture
« Reply #59 on Jan 30, 2009, 3:13pm »		[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
Hi Mtoto,


Quote:
Put numbers against most of the requirements listed above


They’re all numbers apart from the last one and we’d be better off with a number for that.

Class - is numbered 1 to 7, used to be letters
Courses - not used these days, were grouped and numbered by class
Pace - only can imagine at the time he used speed ratings or final time
Going - won’t have used a number but we do now and would have been better then using a time based one.
Distance - won/beat is a measurement
How they performed in the later stages of each race – even now with everything televised we would probably be better off with a number telling us how fast the actual last 2 furlongs were rather than someone’s visual interpretation.

ATB
Steve
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 90.195.10.21
« Page 2 of 10 » Jump to page   Go    [Search This Thread] [Add Bookmark][Reply] [Send Topic To Friend] [Print]
Admin Functions: [Move Topic] [Remove Topic] [Unlock Topic] [Sticky Topic] [Make Announcement] [Bump Topic]


Quick Reply
Message:

Shortcut to Quick Reply box: Alt+Q. Shortcut to post message: Alt+S.

Google
Webblackcat-racing.proboards.com
Click Here To Make This Board Ad-Free


This Board Hosted For FREE By ProBoards | Privacy Policy
Get Your Own Free Message Boards & Free Forums!