|
Post by makingitslowly on Jul 4, 2009 21:21:55 GMT
|
|
|
Post by makingitslowly on Jul 4, 2009 21:36:04 GMT
This was posted by Proprice on the 01/07/2009 and may have some relevance.
"I moved some time ago from following the Van der Wheil 'methodology', mainly because it is too restrictive, if that is possible? It means just considering high class races with a high percentage of winning form, that is if you follow the 'elementary mechanical procedures'' not for those who have moved on to researching how trainers place horses etc. The basic methodology is emeinently suitable for novice punters or those more experienced who cannot make their racing pay.
The following is a post I put in the Massey forum a couple of days ago and it's as good a starting point as any, where I wrote, quoting VDW verbatum:
(My interpretation may be open to debate but I have no problem with that at all).
"Some of the early signposts on the road to success given by VDW at this juncture." 1. Narrowing the field 2. Looking at horses that win a high percentage of races with regard to their form figures. 3. Studyng the first 5 in the betting forecast of non-handicap races and the first 6 in handicaps. 4. Using two rating methods. 5. AND perhaps most important of all, combining these points....'subject to other considerations.'
"Taken step by step and starting with the principal meeting the agenda is: 1. Select the most valuable race on the card. 2. Consider the next most valuable race. 3. Select the most valuable race from other cards. 4. Rate entire field for ability. 5. Select most consistent from the first 5 or 6 in the betting forecast. 6. Apply second rating method to entire field." "
|
|
|
Post by makingitslowly on Jul 4, 2009 21:40:56 GMT
This was posted by someone named Bobajobber on the 02/07/2009.
"I decided to do a race,just to basically try and understand it,...the figures furthest to the right are: (320-10-11),..Ability(Class)+Distance Ran +Position Finished in its last 3 races.
Haydock 3.40(Class 90) No....Last Run...Name 1 346002* Flipando..........................56 24.........320-10-11/ 170-9-11/ 120-8-2 2 523-20 Final Verse.......................32*21........80-9-3/ 90-8-2/ 620-8-16 3 639-71* One Way Or Another........14* 17*.....200-10-9/ 90-7-7/ 90-8-1 4 01-915* Angel Rock.....................56 15*.......50-10-9/ 90-8-1/ 170-9-5 5 1/40P0 Foolin Myself.....................56 34..........310-9-12/ 240-10-0/ 170-9-18 6 58-920 Toto Skyllachy...................31*26.........40-8-9/ 110-8-2/ 170-9-15 7 20-507 Mujaadel...........................51 22..........70-7-5/ 110-8-10/ 70-7-7 8 48-473* Summer Gold....................14* 14*.....50-10-4/ 70-8-7/ 50-8-3 9 3-4123* Pride Of Kings..................52 6*.........32-8-1/ 40-10-2/ 50-8-3
I am hoping it is right on the stage 2,...I have to add up all the days total in its last 5 races.
Flipando*..Outclassed 2nd and 3rd runs back,runs well at Haydock,down in grade Final*Verse*..Outclassed last race,consistant before that,Closely weighted with Flipando,down in grade One*Way*Or Another...Mostly Australian form,..carried big weight over same class,..Dark Horse Angel*Rock*.....Same grade,wrong going Foolin*Myself*...Raised a grade,NG Toto*Skyllachy...Wrong Going,wrong grade.NG Mujaadel*....Wrong grade,NG Summer*Gold..Wrong Grade Pride*Of*Kings*...Raised in grade,improver,but not today
Summary:
I think VDW points towards,... One Way Or The Other
My gut instinct tells me that,... Flipando and Final Verse are the Class horses.
Ignoring Flipando's 2nd and 3rd race,he certainly has a chance on consistancy,but the fact he has never won off a big weight....plus he never quite gets there,...always the bridemaid,..etc. So I am going to plump for FINAL VERSE and Kirsty Milkshake,..it would be nice to make a good start"
Here is the response from Fulham on the same day.
"Bob
VDW offered several ways of analysing races and it takes time to sort out what aspects he seemed always to use and which seem to have been one offs (such as days since last run). I would suggest that it is easiest to think of the process as having two stages - identifying the most likely winner (which VDW referred to as the class/form horse) and then assessing whether the class/form horse has the "winner in the race" characteristics and is thus strong enough to back or (much more often) is insufficiently strong and should be left.
Starting with stage one, the order in which the examples suggest VDW worked is (a) identify the consistent horses, (b) from the consistent horses identify the probables, (c) from the probables identify those with form, and (d) from the probables with form identify the class/form horse.
In the 3.40 Haydock, assuming all nine run (if, for example, Angel Rock becomes a non runner the whole analysis will need to be re-worked)
Consistent horses: those within the first six of the forecast (which using the RP forecast unusually and unhelpfully includes the whole field), the three with the lowest consistency aggregates: Pride of Kings (6), Summer Gold (14), Angel Rock, Final Verse (15). (The horses with the three lowest consistency aggregates within the first six and equals of the forecast (handicaps) are almost always consistent horses.) Plus others - in this case only One Way Or Another (identified on the same criterion as VDW used for Prominent King).
So five consistent horses.
Probables: applying the method that generates the numbers in the Prominent King illustration, Angel Rock is eliminated, leaving four probables.
Probables with form: using the operationalisation of the definition of form VDW gave in his March 1981 article that one has to work out from the examples, Summer Gold is not a form horse, so we have three probables with form.
Class/form horse: setting out the three probables with form in decending ability rating order we have:
One Way Or Another - 102 Final Verse - 97 Pride Of Kings - 32
Normally the class/form horse is the highest ability rated probable with form, in this case One Way Or Another, but there are exceptions the "rules" for which need to be dug out of the examples, in particular Clayside, Von Trappe and Pegwell Bay. In this case matters are not wholly clear cut as OWOA and Final Verse have ARs not so far apart (and OWOA's is mainly generated by overseas winnings which can distort) and there is not much between them in terms of form. The fact that, for me at least, the class/form horse isn't 100% obvious is a major hint that this is not a race to bet in.
If we were convinced One Way Or Another was the class/form horse, that would mean that, on VDW's assumptions, he was the horse most likely to win, but that means only that from these assumptions he has a greater chance than any other individual runner. Expressing it in crude probability terms, in a nine runner race that could mean anything from OWOA having a 12% chance of winning (with the others all on 11%) or an 80%+ chance (the threshold at which VDW implied a class/form horse was worth backing). The second stage is where we establish whether the c/f has the characteristics of an 80% horse.
In fact, a glance at OWOA's profile tells one that he is nowhere near being an 80% horse - compared with the likes of VDW's bets running in the same or higher class after a win, such as Little Owl and Sunset Cristo from the March 1981 article, he is woefully short of consistency. He may well win, but as sure as today's Thursday VDW wouldn't have backed him.
This race is actually something of a nightmare, as there are several other runners who, if they won, would occasion no great surprise, eg
Final Verse: one of the probables with form. Out of his depth lto but otherwise more consistent than OWOA, not far adrift on the ability rating and arguably with as good a form.
Flipando: may be coming back to form and now only 2lb above best winning OR. Course, trip and going ideal, though 10.00 may prove too much and he may need to drop another pound or two in the ratings before winning.
Foolin Myself: very unexposed, went off favourite for a much stronger race three runs ago, and well backed next time out in another race of much higher class than today's. VDW wrote about horses which flopped with favourite and in due time make the winner's enclosure when less fancied;
Pride of Kings: the other probable with form, very consistent and relatively unexposed.
So for me definitely a race to leave alone. Arguably the greatest asset of the VDW method is that it stops one getting involved unless the odds are extremely well stacked in one's favour."
|
|
|
Post by makingitslowly on Jul 5, 2009 8:25:48 GMT
first colm....bhb rating+raceform speed+consistency rating 2nd colm...consistency 3rd colm.....speed rating+consistency 4th colm.....raceform handicap rating+consistency 5th colm.....lto class rating Can you tell me where to find the information required for the above race evaluation please.
|
|
|
Post by Les on Jul 5, 2009 10:35:24 GMT
|
|
|
Post by makingitslowly on Jul 5, 2009 10:39:58 GMT
Cheers for getting back to me Les.
Like you Im just starting out on this subject(I think your away ahead of me personally),so am open to learning as well.
It certainly looks promising.
|
|
|
Post by makingitslowly on Jul 5, 2009 10:40:27 GMT
Also I hope some of the material I have posted above proves to be useful.
|
|
|
Post by Les on Jul 5, 2009 10:40:39 GMT
yes and thank you ,play around with this and enjoy it
|
|
|
Post by Les on Jul 5, 2009 10:44:44 GMT
never got anywhere till i abandoned the money won ability rating done my head in maybe because the money nowadays is so large it threw it all out of kilter
|
|
|
Post by Les on Jul 5, 2009 10:47:51 GMT
read the piece at the begining by marchwood i think its the best, helps me read my raceform better ,its not all a jumble of figures now
|
|
|
Post by makingitslowly on Jul 5, 2009 10:59:01 GMT
never got anywhere till i abandoned the money won ability rating done my head in maybe because the money nowadays is so large it threw it all out of kilter Its possible that over time some ratings become defunct,especially as more accurate ways of evaluating data are found.
|
|
|
Post by makingitslowly on Jul 5, 2009 11:01:28 GMT
read the piece at the begining by marchwood i think its the best, helps me read my raceform better ,its not all a jumble of figures now Im actually reading and re-reading this piece. I would like to say thanks Les for renewing my interest in this.
|
|
|
Post by Les on Jul 5, 2009 11:46:44 GMT
the only thing i would say about this slowly is that i am using it a bit differently in that,i pick the horse first then see if it fits,rather than pick the race then try and pick out something from the top 4 more systematic than methodical
|
|
|
Post by Kimmy on Jul 5, 2009 12:33:16 GMT
You might find the Infineform Ratings board interesting posted above.
|
|
|
Post by Les on Jul 6, 2009 10:54:56 GMT
because i have no access to raceform today,i can rate a race by using the mail and the mirror,never done it that way before first checked to see if top rated agree in each paper there were 5 races check to see if any of these horses have a high consistency rating and points in front of next consistent narrowed it down to the 8,50 ripon
montiboli..........130..........22........100.........52 blue charm.......114..........10.........85..........39 direct debit.......113..........12.........88..........37 veronicas boy...113..........11.........85..........39
so montiboli top rated across the top top course jockey top course trainer mail form spot mirror top rated fav sf spot in mirror won over c/d lto dont know if there could be more things going for it lol
|
|
|
Post by makingitslowly on Jul 6, 2009 12:24:47 GMT
Certainly looks on paper to be Montiboli's race mate.Good luck.
|
|
|
Post by Les on Jul 6, 2009 19:56:35 GMT
good this init
|
|
|
Post by Kimmy on Jul 6, 2009 20:10:00 GMT
|
|
|
Post by makingitslowly on Jul 6, 2009 20:28:42 GMT
Another one goe's in,well done Les.
|
|
|
Post by Les on Jul 7, 2009 8:36:58 GMT
with ratings missing from my mirror on the only race that qualified i,ll leave it today,
|
|
|
Post by Kimmy on Jul 7, 2009 8:43:15 GMT
Which ratings do you want?
|
|
|
Post by Les on Jul 7, 2009 8:54:29 GMT
some ratings missing from the bottom of the 4.30 at ponty it looks like a printing error?,sorry kimmy the mirror wont have time now backshift thought that maybe red cape could be a selection with its comfortable win lto
|
|
|
Post by Kimmy on Jul 7, 2009 8:58:50 GMT
Will have a look in my paper when it comes and see if I have got them. Will post and let you know. Will be about 10.30ish.
|
|
|
Post by Les on Jul 7, 2009 9:02:56 GMT
when in doubt leave it out nothing today
|
|
|
Post by makingitslowly on Jul 7, 2009 16:12:19 GMT
Dickie le davoir done the buisness in this race at 11/1.It was posted as a VDW possible on another forum prior to the race,along with Red cape and Novellan lad.
|
|
|
Post by makingitslowly on Jul 7, 2009 19:17:21 GMT
A post by a Mr Kildare today at 4.23PM.
"Ladies/Gentlemen
Please excuse the possible re-hashing of the subject which has been discussed earlier in this forum about the 1978 Erin Foods Irish Champion Hurdle run at Leopardstown and the system used by VDW (never heard of by me before - but that's prob my loss !!)
Mr Kildare was owned by my late father (Owen Carty who died 2 years ago aged eighty eight) and I remember him well ! He was an American bred gelding (by Hill Clown x Vahine) that my father bought in 1976 for the now amazing amount of IRĀ£30,000 ( you could buy a house for about 15-12k in those days)
He has won the Leop Nov H'Cap and what was then a NH Flat race, the JT Rogers Memorial Gold Cup at the Curragh - he subsequently won the same two races under our ownership the following year, completing the so-called 'double double'. In the JT Rogers (the 2nd time) he beat horse called La Cita, trained by Clem Magnier, giving her 42lbs weight (yes - forty two !!)
He then went over hurdles, the Erin Foods being only his 3rd outing over the flights !
I remember that morning well at home, because my Dad was 'hopeful' but didn't really think, even off a light weight, that he could compete with the class horses like Monksfield and Beacon Light.
In fact he should have won - approaching the last he was upsides Monksfield and beginning to take the lead. Tommy Carmody (Jockey) got a good jump from him, but he stumbled on landing and split his off fore shoe in two (a fact that never became public) and therefore lost a length on Monksfield who then seemed was going to win, but MK was nothing if not gutsy, and battled back to beat him, only for them both to be pipped by Prominent King and Bobby Coogan at the post - a memorable day indeed , especially for a 13 year old.
One of my late father's regrets was that when he won the Sun Alliance in Cheltenham, beating Eddie O'Grady's Flame Gun, was that we dod not run him again in on the Thursday, like Flame Gun who came out and won !
Thank You for the opportunity to remember such a brilliant horse"
One of many hoax's?
|
|
|
Post by Les on Jul 8, 2009 7:44:08 GMT
well kimmy if you thought that the mirror was bad yesterday with ratings missing the raceform update has a full race missing today
newmarket 1.30
cumana bay .........218.....25......133.....131 photographic........211.....11.......117....120 never lose............210......16.......118.....121 mo muhurinin........206......26......126.....131
cumana bay,top speed ,top speed plus,good consistency rating trained by hannon and like cyflymder on saturday will he make his top rating count by trying to make all, as did montiboli the other day after coming out of a c/d win any thoughts anyone
|
|
|
Post by makingitslowly on Jul 8, 2009 7:55:18 GMT
My 2 cents...
Cumana bay is not as clearly top rated as Montiboli was.Montiboli was CLEAR top on all four counts.Than being said Hannon is a trainer I have a lot of respect for.I would say its a "no bet" due to not being top in all four area's,maybe the temprament that VDW mentions.So close though its tempting to bet.
|
|
|
Post by Les on Jul 8, 2009 8:01:07 GMT
its the split second and speed plus thats swaying me jason i,ve heard them speak of this as well
|
|
|
Post by Les on Jul 8, 2009 8:06:42 GMT
will he use its c/d experience the same as cyflymder on saturday and the same as montiboli and go early and say well pass me?
|
|