Joined: Jan 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 5,628 Location: Scotland
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture « Reply #90 on Feb 1, 2009, 11:30am »
I purged quite a lot of files recently im sure i had more on that New Guinea debate as well.Guest had a few things to say on Roushayd also and although his strike rate was questioned at a later date i thought he was a classy guy who the van der wheely boys at the time learned a lot from.
Guest Member Posted March 27, 2003 02:56 AM Hide Post As Fulham has pointed out, VDW did explain that he wrote two versions of Systematic Betting, but only released the less informative version. Parts of this were reprinted and expanded upon in Racing In My Systems where VDW bold typed certain points and passages.
I don't see how some think that VDW ever revealed all his approach without leaving some work to be done by the reader. The point I was making regards VDW isolating the winner in Roushayds races was that he had a way to do it. It wasn't a hidden method or suchlike, but the very same approach he was demonstrating. I don't think VDW was referring to improvement and speed figures when he said he thought the object of the exercise had been misunderstood. To be brutally honest, a 10 year old can see the obvious points made in the examples and if they were the only points of note then it was more of a system than a method.
No, given a lot of thought and research there is an underlying theme throughout that is there to plainly see and when you spot it you will wonder how on earth you could miss it.
Still the arguments come and no one has attempted to address the questions I keep posing. Just what do others think I am getting at? Posts: 748 | Registered: February 18, 2002
Guest Member Posted March 27, 2003 11:39 AM Hide Post There is no need for mystery and I don't think there really is anything too mysterious about VDWs approach. However, by his own admission he did leave some work for us to complete and he did present things piece by piece over a long period of time. As he said "to splash the whole lot in front of readers would be a pointless exercise." It was in fact Tony Peach who called a halt to discussions of his method in the Sports Forum due to unrest from some of the readership. VDW had no quibble with that by all accounts.
I remarked on Racing In My Systems expanding on the Roushayd exercise, and whilst it was in fact a shorter text, VDW did highlight some extra areas of interest though. For instance in his description of how to produce an easy race class rating for comparison he warns that "the class of a horse is different from the class of race in which they run and as I shall be referring SPECIFICALLY to the races run, here is I how I produce...".
He also pointed out that "I appraise each horse's record from 2yo (flat racing) and this should prove useful to serious punters".
He went on "The draft concerned Roushayd and this is the one I will be evaluating in MORE DEPTH, but please keep in mind that in practice ALL HORSES receive the same attention".
He then gave a brief summary of Roushayds 2yo career and noted considerable improvement on his 2nd run at Newbury and stated "One way to note improvement is to equate race class with ratings achieved".
VDW set out the races involved by listing the finishing order in full with previous class, distance and position, but he analysed each race as if he was looking at it beforehand. In practice he would have been and that is a key point so many are completely missing I feel.
In the 2nd race he noted that "the three with a run and the highest race class, Shimshek,Ala Hounak and Merce Cunningham were an odd bunch. Neither Shimshek nor Ala Hounak have much in the way of class (AS HORSES) and both have shown they would be better over longer distance. Merce Cunningham does have some class."
Let's look at the ability ratings in this race down the card.
Iben Bey 316 Ala Hounak 46 Roushayd 231 Chauve Souris 34 Golden Isle 29 Merce Cunningham 56 Milton Burn 28 Our Eliaso 17 Shimshek 19
One further point of interest was in the Northern Dancer, the 3rd race where he noted "..and Failiq, 2nd to Billet last time, had been dropped a long way in class. Nothing in that race hinted at a reversal this time." Posts: 748 | Registered: February 18, 2002
I think Lee's phrase "twenty minutes" is of the essence. One can say a lot in 20 minutes and if I am on the right lines Van der Wheil's method does need some understanding and can't be reduced to half a dozen two line rules which seem to be the norm with the kind of systems Colin Davey and co. peddle (indeed, for that matter, some of Jock Bingham's).
"Once you find it, you'll wonder how on earth you could miss it" refers to one simple paragraph, which VDW repeated again and again. Any other conclusion is wild supposition.
Joined: Jan 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 5,628 Location: Scotland
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture « Reply #92 on Feb 1, 2009, 12:13pm »
"Once you find it, you'll wonder how on earth you could miss it" refers to one simple paragraph, which VDW repeated again and again. Any other conclusion is wild supposition. ............................................................................................
JD tell me what this `IT`is ah hivnae backed a winner this year.
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture « Reply #93 on Feb 1, 2009, 12:15pm »
Johnd
That 7th para. of the November 2007 Lee post Walter kindly put up must make you feel very uncomfortable. As Lee says, in the absence of Van der Wheil, the best test of whether one is on the right lines is results, plus of course conformity with the bits of the method that are clearly set out.
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture « Reply #94 on Feb 1, 2009, 12:41pm »
Its nice to see some decent contributions and thanks to those that have supplied information from informative posts.
Lee appeared to be respected as he demonstrated a decent strike rate from his selections and its always good to read what someone who can has to say, as opposed to those that hint they have superior knowledge by refering to the odd cryptic remark made by VDW. Sadly they fail to substantiate that knowledge when posting numerous selections that consistently fail to win.
Quote Lee
"VDW said, and I have backed this up, that Roushayd should have carried readers along way, and I will offer this up:
VDW detailed the last 3 races that Roushayd contested giving a prιcis of each. One (but not all) of the points thats missed is that each race was won by the horse that VDW/the method pinpointed as the most likely winner. This is significant because it means that the form is unquestionable and consistent, and when balanced against the competition of the Old Newton Cup, and their previous form it is streets ahead."
It is my understanding that Lee was pointing the reader towards the following VDW Quote "When you have followed the method for sometime it is easy to turn back to your records concerning agiven horse and it will help to balance respective performances"
Quote Lee
"VDWs basic numerical picture, which you choose not to use as set out, is the platform for EVERYTHING he writes about. As he expands his method with examples such as Pegwell Bay and Roushayd the basic picture is still the foundation. Depending on how the competitors finish it will pinpoint those that are on the boil. Not everything that made up the numerical pictures was revealed, indeed he told us so; some of it was left for the reader to work out, and it is crucial that they do.
Recent form is most important and therefore the last 3 runs (normally all thats required), along with the Ability Rating of every horse, are used to see if the race holds a winner within it.
I am not for one moment suggesting that form from further back in a horses career is not part of the VDW method, but Im talking about the establishment of consistent form that can only be assessed by delving in to a horses most recent form.
In practice the problem is approached from a different angle. All the information is collated prior to racing, and a study of the results at the end of the day shows if any have shown well, in view of how the race finished i.e who won and who was beaten. They are then noted, and watched.
Of course, those finishing close behind a good thing, and the good thing itself are always noted (Pegwell Bay, Ile de Chypre, Vouchsafe). It is then waiting to see what happens next with them and how they are placed."
Once again thanks to all those Forum Members who have shared their archive material.
Joined: Jan 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 5,628 Location: Scotland
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture « Reply #95 on Feb 1, 2009, 5:24pm »
In practice the problem is approached from a different angle. All the information is collated prior to racing, and a study of the results at the end of the day shows if any have shown well, in view of how the race finished i.e who won and who was beaten. They are then noted, and watched.
Of course, those finishing close behind a good thing, and the good thing itself are always noted (Pegwell Bay, Ile de Chypre, Vouchsafe). It is then waiting to see what happens next with them and how they are placed." ...............................................................................................
In the Pegwell Bay example vdw says after the race that the result makes it look as if PB can win again.
12 Nov 1988 2:10 CHELTENHAM Mackeson Gold Cup Handicap Chase (Listed Race)2m4f Good To Firm £22,140.55, £6,639.40, £3,194.70, £1,472.35 RESULTRATE RACE Show all comments in running Show all pedigrees HORSE/SP AGE WGT TRAINER/JOCKEY OR TS RPR RATED
1 Pegwell Bay SP 6/1 Tobique - Multigrey (Eastern Lyric I) 7 11-23 T A Forster Peter Scudamore 71 Jumped well, led 8th, clear last, driven out
2 10 Dudie I SP 20/1 Karabas - En Clair (Tarqogan) 10 10-0 R Akehurst Dale McKeown 48 Prominent to 11th, rallied and every chance 3 out, beaten when hit last
3 1½ Townley Stone SP 7/1 Legal Tender I - Dream Isle (Jupiter Island) 9 10-5 J Webber G Mernagh 60 Prominent, every chance 2 out, ridden and beaten approaching last
4 ½ Jim Thorpe SP 3/1F Gunner B - Burriana (Kalydon) 7 11-10 G Richards P Tuck 82 Mistake 4th, soon behind, headway 12th, never near to challenge
5 3 Welsh Oak SP 20/1 Jimsun - Besselsleigh Lass (Quorum) 8 10-12 D R Gandolfo S Smith Eccles 40 Prominent until ridden and lost place 7th, stayed on again from 2 out
6 ½ Warner For Leisure SP 12/1 Jimsun - Besselsleigh Lass (Quorum) 10 10-9 P J Hobbs M Richards 64 In touch until outpaced 8th, stayed on again from 2 out
7 Ύ Smart Tar SP 14/1 Seaepic (USA) - I'm Smart*t (Menelek) 7 10-10 M J Wilkinson M M Lynch 65 Chased leaders, weakening when hampered 3 out
8 6 Bishops Yarn SP 14/1 Tycoon II - Lilac Veil (Dumbarnie) 9 11-10 G B Balding Richard Guest 79 Held up, headway 11th, not reach leaders
9 3 Giolla Padraig SP 5/1 Giolla Mear - Barrettstown Belle (Twilight Alley) 10 10-3 W A Stephenson A Costello (7) 65 Headway 7th, every chance when mistake 2 out, weakened quickly flat
10 Gee-A SP 25/1 Arapaho - Arctic Daisy (Arctic Slave) 9 10-13 G A Hubbard Gee Armytage 68 Led to 8th, behind from 12th
11 The Argonaut (NZ) SP 12/1 Show Off - Syalbi (NZ) (Sobig) 10 10-12 F Walwyn S Shilston 67 Lost place 4th, reminders 6th, no chance when hampered 3 out
12 Ace Of Spies SP 50/1 He Loves Me - Belle Bergere (Faberge II) 7 10-0 Mrs Gill E Jones G Landau 46 Always behind
F Comeragh King SP 11/1 Raise You Ten - Driella (Even Money) 9 11-1 J G Fitzgerald Mark Dwyer 70 Pulled hard, chased leaders, every chance when fell 3 out
13 ran TIME 5m 3.10s (equals standard time) Total SP 120%
Assessing vdw`s pre-race working his thought`s on the 2nd and third horses Dudie & Townley Stone reads.
Dudie : First run and has`nt been impressive.
Townley Stone : Comparitively has a lot of ability, but has gone off winning - only won twice in last twenty outings.Recent form not impressive and went down to a 25 class race to collect on final outing last season.
How was vdw sure that PB would win again if he had just beaten two horses who`s recent form had not been impressive?.
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture « Reply #97 on Feb 1, 2009, 6:36pm »
Its interesting that PB dropped down in class next time out and depsite rising 10bls on official figures, carried 3lbs less in actual weight on Dec 10th 88
Joined: Jan 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 5,628 Location: Scotland
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture « Reply #98 on Feb 1, 2009, 6:48pm »
Cheers boys : Did vdw submit his Pegwell Bay example to press before he ran his next race or was his comment `The result makes it appear he is capable of winning again before long` made after the 10th Dec?.
10 Dec 1988 1:55 CHELTENHAM A. F. Budge Gold Cup Handicap Chase (Listed Race)2m4f Good £18,600.00, £5,550.00, £2,650.00, £1,200.00 RESULTRATE RACE Show all comments in running Show all pedigrees HORSE/SP AGE WGT TRAINER/JOCKEY OR TS RPR RATED
1 Pegwell Bay SP 7/2 Tobique - Multigrey (Eastern Lyric I) 7 10-13 T A Forster B Powell 81 157 Jumped well, led 5th, ridden approaching last, ran on well
2 1½ Beau Ranger SP 100/30F Beau Chapeau - Sand Martin (Menelek) 10 12-0 M C Pipe Peter Scudamore 96 170 Led to 5th, every chance from 2 out, ridden, ran on well
3 shd Oregon Trail SP 20/1 Auction Ring (USA) - Oriental Star (Falcon) 8 10-2 S Christian J Osborne 70 144 Behind, headway 13th, stayed on well approaching last
4 3 Comeragh King SP 11/2 Raise You Ten - Driella (Even Money) 9 10-2 J G Fitzgerald Mark Dwyer 70 141 Chased leaders, every chance when hit 3 out, ridden and no extra flat
5 15 Stay On Tracks SP 11/2 Roselier (FR) - Bee In Bonnet (Track Spare) 6 10-0 W A Stephenson A Merrigan 68 124 Headway 8th, ridden 13th, soon beaten
6 12 Bishops Yarn SP 16/1 Tycoon II - Lilac Veil (Dumbarnie) 9 10-11 G B Balding Richard Guest 79 123 Behind, effort 3 out, no impression
7 1½ Dunkirk SP 20/1 Beau Chapeau - Romany Miss (Master Owen) 12 10-11 M E D Francis Peter Hobbs 67 111 Prominent until weakened 7th
8 shd Gee-A SP 66/1 Arapaho - Arctic Daisy (Arctic Slave) 9 10-0 G A Hubbard M Williams 55 110 Chased leaders until weakened approaching 3 out
PU Tickite Boo SP 8/1 Laurence O - Charity May (Dual) 8 11-0 J G Fitzgerald R Dunwoody 82 Chased leaders to 12th, behind when pulled up before 2 out, lame
10 ran TIME 5m 12.30s (equals standard time) Total SP 114%
Joined: Jan 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 5,628 Location: Scotland
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture « Reply #100 on Feb 1, 2009, 7:24pm »
Im confused as well les : ................................................................ Recent form is most important and therefore the last 3 runs (normally all thats required), along with the Ability Rating of every horse, are used to see if the race holds a winner within it. ................................................................
12 Nov 1988 2:10 CHELTENHAM Mackeson Gold Cup Handicap Chase (Listed Race)2m4f Good To Firm £22,140.55, £6,639.40, £3,194.70, £1,472.35 RESULTRATE RACE Show all comments in running Show all pedigrees HORSE/SP AGE WGT TRAINER/JOCKEY OR TS RPR RATED
1 Pegwell Bay SP 6/1 Tobique - Multigrey (Eastern Lyric I) 7 11-23 T A Forster Peter Scudamore 71 Jumped well, led 8th, clear last, driven out
2 10 Dudie I SP 20/1 Karabas - En Clair (Tarqogan) 10 10-0 R Akehurst Dale McKeown 48 Prominent to 11th, rallied and every chance 3 out, beaten when hit last
3 1½ Townley Stone SP 7/1 Legal Tender I - Dream Isle (Jupiter Island) 9 10-5 J Webber G Mernagh 60 Prominent, every chance 2 out, ridden and beaten approaching last ...............................................................
Were the ability ratings of the 2nd & 3rd whom vdw conceded were not running to their best form going into the Mackeson reason enough as to why he was capable of winning again soon?. And if the higher ability rated horses such as Smart Tar finished down the field how does this leave calcs from the race?.
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture « Reply #102 on Feb 1, 2009, 7:35pm »
The race finished equal to standard time so the race was run at a good pace and as i said PW was not pressured to get the result if had it would have been faster than standard so won with a bit still in the tank imo
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture « Reply #103 on Feb 1, 2009, 7:38pm »
Walter
I think you may well be reading more into the comment than it really stands, and Michael's seems to me the likely reason for it. We can't regard Pegwell Bay as a selection for his next race, as Van der Wheil couldn't know for sure what race that would be, or what competition the horse would face, and his approach is all about applying general principles, translated into concrete rules, to the specific circumstances of each race.
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture « Reply #106 on Feb 1, 2009, 7:49pm »
if as monster says all you need is the vdw grid all that would be taken from the race would be ability rating of the race and the fact that it won,he went on to say any 2 sets of ratings would do for the other ratings [vdw] so?
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture « Reply #109 on Feb 1, 2009, 8:02pm »
More Posts from Lee
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.
The next problem is how the elements of VDW's equation go together to weigh up acurately if there is a winner in the race; as stated previously consistency is key at each stage. Probability is odds and as we all know, when looking at the form of a past race the best horse (the winner) in the race isn't always favourite. This is an area that requires focus because being installed as the favourite before the race reflects the majority view - and that majority view is a valuable element of form. How the race pans out, and who is involved from the distance is the crucial element to weighing up form. What did the winner do in each of its last 3 races? Was it involved from the distance? Who was it involved against? This will help evaluate the strength of the race its just won. VDW said to go back as far as you like, and that the exercise would be useful.
The problem can be tricky though because the class of race in which a horse runs is important - the prize is the most important element in horse racing, without the prize racing wouldn't exist and those who suggest that prize money, as a gauge to class, is useless, are missing a trick. The majority view coupled with how the race pans out will also assist in identifying those horses that are ready to win. What the trainer does next can then be analysed.
When everything lines up the horse in question is seldom beaten. Our own temperament is the only thing that will then stand in our way. It will get all of us who try, just some will suffer more than others.
We are only 3 weeks in to the flat season and once again VDW is producing the goods. Although some adjustments have had to be made, given the changes to Split Seconds ratings, there have been 4 horses run so far from my list of horses to follow.
Weavers Pride came out at Doncaster in a low class maiden. Nothing else had shown anything like his form as a 2yo in the Champagne Stakes and in my opinion was a good thing at 6/4. Unigold was also a good thing at Nottingham but un-backable at the price. Tomahawk was another at the Curragh, but again was too short for me. The only horse to run so far that was not worthy of support 1st time out was Titurel. He made his reappearance in a class 85 Conditions race where he finished 3rd with a Speed figure of 99 giving a good account of himself and its now time to see where the trainer goes next! The method holds up every year and is incredibly successful. The list will grow over the next few weeks and Id expect to make around 25 30 bets from them in the season.
Which brings me on to the main reason for posting the above. In support of Mtoto I would say that some of the above may bear some resemblance to the way he works for both rules and across all ages. The class of race in which Titurel showed his worth as far as speed figures are concerned was in a class 51 maiden over 1m at Newbury. Out first time as a 3yo in a higher-class conditions race against better opposition told us that it was not yet time. But now its time to keep a close eye on him and see where the trainers decides to go next. Remember the premise for the list he appeared on was from Split Seconds list select those horses which were raced not more than 3 times without winning and which achieved the rating over a minimum of 7f at Asc, Don, Goo, Nby, Nmk, San, Yor.
In posting the above Im hoping that Mtoto and others will see that Myself/Guest and others are completely aware of the power of speed when assessing the ability of a horse, and realise that when we harp on about the ability rating and its worth we are doing so with a WORKING knowledge of both factors. Ive been following this method now for a number of years and if I thought that it were a better judge of a horses ability than that VDW showed us for older more exposed types I would stick to it, but in my opinion it isnt.
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture « Reply #110 on Feb 1, 2009, 8:06pm »
the mackeson,s money would boost its average ,boost its consistency rating, and leave it with a good third column rating,so he could say it had a good chance of following up
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture « Reply #111 on Feb 1, 2009, 8:08pm »
EC
It isn't.
Over approx. five months I have found a tiny percentage of races without a class/form horse, and a rather bigger percentage where I am not sure which is the class/form horse. But in nine out of ten or more the class/form horse is readily identified and that would always be Van der Wheil's selection (he defined the class/form horse as the "one most likely to win"), though sometimes possibly in a book with one or more other probable with form.
But we know that Van der Wheil didn't back all his selections - eg Kenlis, Gaye Chance and Wild Gamble from the March 1981 article - and indeed in one piece says he backs only about 20%. So even if a whole load of properly identified class/form horses were posted, one wouldn't expect anything like 80% to win. What Van der Wheil was claiming - though as far as I know never independently verified - was that at least 80% of the bets would win. In round terms, for every 100 races evaluated which generated class/form horses, he'd have backed 20 and expect at least 16 of the 20 to win.
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture « Reply #112 on Feb 1, 2009, 8:26pm »
Interesting to read Lee's posts again.
I have to say even after reading (and thinking) about them in some detail they have done little to change my mind about the measure of ability used.
Lee stated...Class and Consistent form pinpoint winners with INCREDIBLE accuracy.. I agree 100% with this statement, but VDW said form and class must be equated, his exact words were.... Logically, the relative merit of form must be equated to the quality (class) in which it was achieved. How can this be achieved using a rating that doesn't measure form. As Lee and others have said the ability rating doesn't measure form, the ability rating uses all winning races recent or not. How can the form be measured against this mish mash? Interestingly most when they do try to equate the form only use the last three race, how does this work? Surely it can only show if a horse is in form (ruining up to standard) if the bulk of the races that form the ability rating are outside this range, how are you doing as VDW suggested? VDW said recent form is more reliable, but he didn't say it was the most important.
Lee also said.........VDW said, and I have backed this up, that Roushayd should have carried readers along way. Here again I agree with VDW but I don't think I agree with Lee as to the reason VDW said it. I agree the examples pinpointed as the most likely winner, but again I think Lee has missed the true reason these horses were the most likely winners. Find that, (all of them have the same achievement) and then with a little thought the winning selections in the early examples are found.
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture « Reply #116 on Feb 1, 2009, 9:47pm »
Mtoto/Monster This looks like two post put together this piece from were Lee says we are only 3week into the flat season was posted on Gummy forum on 2/April/03 at 07.17 am
Mtoto/Monster This looks like two post put together this piece from were Lee says we are only 3week into the flat season was posted on Gummy forum on 2/April/03 at 07.17 am
Hi Deano
I understand that the first part With a helpful nudge was posted on 15th march 2008
Joined: Jan 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 5,628 Location: Scotland
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture « Reply #118 on Feb 2, 2009, 10:24am »
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.
That`s my point re- Pegwell Bay`s win in the Mackeson - he`s run away and hid from two out of form horses (vdw`s words). If what is happening down the field is of no importance to the form student then PB is judged on those finishing closest to him -yes/no?.
Joined: Jan 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 5,628 Location: Scotland
Re: What Is the Second Numerical picture « Reply #119 on Feb 2, 2009, 10:38am »
Even if you were to take the `What a horse does or does`nt do from the distance` as the reference - the distance being just over 1f out (agree/disagree?) it really only leaves the front 3 and that`s at a push.
12 Nov 1988 2:10 CHELTENHAM Mackeson Gold Cup Handicap Chase (Listed Race)2m4f Good To Firm £22,140.55, £6,639.40, £3,194.70, £1,472.35 RESULTRATE RACE Show all comments in running Show all pedigrees HORSE/SP AGE WGT TRAINER/JOCKEY OR TS RPR RATED
1 Pegwell Bay SP 6/1 Tobique - Multigrey (Eastern Lyric I) 7 11-23 T A Forster Peter Scudamore 71 Jumped well, led 8th, clear last, driven out
2 10 Dudie I SP 20/1 Karabas - En Clair (Tarqogan) 10 10-0 R Akehurst Dale McKeown 48 Prominent to 11th, rallied and every chance 3 out, beaten when hit last
3 1½ Townley Stone SP 7/1 Legal Tender I - Dream Isle (Jupiter Island) 9 10-5 J Webber G Mernagh 60 Prominent, every chance 2 out, ridden and beaten approaching last
4 ½ Jim Thorpe SP 3/1F Gunner B - Burriana (Kalydon) 7 11-10 G Richards P Tuck 82 Mistake 4th, soon behind, headway 12th, never near to challenge
5 3 Welsh Oak SP 20/1 Jimsun - Besselsleigh Lass (Quorum) 8 10-12 D R Gandolfo S Smith Eccles 40 Prominent until ridden and lost place 7th, stayed on again from 2 out
6 ½ Warner For Leisure SP 12/1 Jimsun - Besselsleigh Lass (Quorum) 10 10-9 P J Hobbs M Richards 64 In touch until outpaced 8th, stayed on again from 2 out
7 Ύ Smart Tar SP 14/1 Seaepic (USA) - I'm Smart*t (Menelek) 7 10-10 M J Wilkinson M M Lynch 65 Chased leaders, weakening when hampered 3 out
8 6 Bishops Yarn SP 14/1 Tycoon II - Lilac Veil (Dumbarnie) 9 11-10 G B Balding Richard Guest 79 Held up, headway 11th, not reach leaders
9 3 Giolla Padraig SP 5/1 Giolla Mear - Barrettstown Belle (Twilight Alley) 10 10-3 W A Stephenson A Costello (7) 65 Headway 7th, every chance when mistake 2 out, weakened quickly flat
10 Gee-A SP 25/1 Arapaho - Arctic Daisy (Arctic Slave) 9 10-13 G A Hubbard Gee Armytage 68 Led to 8th, behind from 12th
11 The Argonaut (NZ) SP 12/1 Show Off - Syalbi (NZ) (Sobig) 10 10-12 F Walwyn S Shilston 67 Lost place 4th, reminders 6th, no chance when hampered 3 out
12 Ace Of Spies SP 50/1 He Loves Me - Belle Bergere (Faberge II) 7 10-0 Mrs Gill E Jones G Landau 46 Always behind
F Comeragh King SP 11/1 Raise You Ten - Driella (Even Money) 9 11-1 J G Fitzgerald Mark Dwyer 70 Pulled hard, chased leaders, every chance when fell 3 out
13 ran TIME 5m 3.10s (equals standard time) Total SP 120%
![[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/KennethMore.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)
195.93.21.34![[image]](http://blackcat-racing.co.uk/avatars/star.png)
2009 Tipping Challenge Winner 11,449.71 pts profit.... 10 months played. ![[avatar]](http://blackcat-racing.co.uk/avatars/joker.gif)
![[avatar]](http://blackcat-racing.co.uk/avatars/RussellGrant.jpg)
![[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)