Class/form horses

[JennyK]

My Excel application is based around the three VDW elements - class, form and "the other factors" (which I assume means conditions such as going, trip etc) - but in part with different ways of assessing both class and form.

As a test, I have added a new sheet to the application which uses what I think is the most detailed description of his method VDW gave us, that of the 1988 Mackeson won by Pegwell Bay. That illustration builds on what he described as the "first numerical picture" and set out a second, which can help pick up horses coming from higher class races who are not necessarily one of the consistent horses. I think he had a third numerical picture, too, those from the second numerical picture whom he regarded as form horses.

Presumably VDW then assessed the horses in the third numerical picture against "the other factors" (which seem to have eliminated Jim Thorpe in the Mackeson example) and the quality of the form (which I think eliminated the higher ability-rated form horse, Balmers Coombe, making Wild Gamble the class/form horse in his "Spells It All Out" article) to arrive at his class/form horse, the un-eliminated horse from the third numerical picture with the highest ability rating.

For the races I look at, always handicaps, mostly sprints, I thought I would post the VDW class/form horses found using my understanding of his Mackeson approach. Of these, and assuming I've understood the Mackeson approach properly, presumably he would not have regarded 80% or more as strong enough to back, given that he wrote "I would estimate that I wager on less than 20 per cent of horses consider potential winners.

Today:

5.30 Thirsk. Law Of Average

7.10 Windsor. Equity Law

I see them as likely to be in the 80%+ of class/form horses VDW would not have regarded as strong enough to back, but obviously no way of being sure.

 

[Michael231]

Good luck Jenny

 

[JennyK]

Thank you, but these VDW class/form horses (if I've understood his Mackeson method properly) will mostly not be bets for me. I am hoping that when his and mine coincide, they may be especially likely to win; time will tell.

I don't have a selection in either race today - nothing strong enough for a bet or even a dabble. I'll be interested to see how well the VDW class/form horses do, but purely academically, not financially.

(I am also hoping that any VDWer who happens to have looked at any of the races for which I post the class/form horses disagrees that they are VDW class/form horses, he or she will put me right in terms of my understanding of the Mackeson method.)

 

[Chesham]

Law of Average is a non runner

Reason = Travel

 

[Tufnel]

My Excel application is based around the three VDW elements - class, form and "the other factors" (which I assume means conditions such as going, trip etc) - but in part with different ways of assessing both class and form.

As a test, I have added a new sheet to the application which uses what I think is the most detailed description of his method VDW gave us, that of the 1988 Mackeson won by Pegwell Bay. That illustration builds on what he described as the "first numerical picture" and set out a second, which can help pick up horses coming from higher class races who are not necessarily one of the consistent horses. I think he had a third numerical picture, too, those from the second numerical picture whom he regarded as form horses.

Presumably VDW then assessed the horses in the third numerical picture against "the other factors" (which seem to have eliminated Jim Thorpe in the Mackeson example) and the quality of the form (which I think eliminated the higher ability-rated form horse, Balmers Coombe, making Wild Gamble the class/form horse in his "Spells It All Out" article) to arrive at his class/form horse, the un-eliminated horse from the third numerical picture with the highest ability rating.

For the races I look at, always handicaps, mostly sprints, I thought I would post the VDW class/form horses found using my understanding of his Mackeson approach. Of these, and assuming I've understood the Mackeson approach properly, presumably he would not have regarded 80% or more as strong enough to back, given that he wrote "I would estimate that I wager on less than 20 per cent of horses consider potential winners.

Today:

5.30 Thirsk. Law Of Average

7.10 Windsor. Equity Law

I see them as likely to be in the 80%+ of class/form horses VDW would not have regarded as strong enough to back, but obviously no way of being sure.

Law Of Average is a horse from my list, noted because his trainer put this 3yo in against older sprinters from 20lb out of the weights at Epsom last time, a much higher class of race and a huge ask. To be fair the horse showed up well for a long way and will be much better off in this race, but I've not backed him today.

In the 7:10 I've gone with the topweight Jumbeau, but I could very well be wrong.

Good luck.

 

[Chesham]

 

[Tufnel]

JennyK

Initially, the Windsor 7:10 race viewed as per the Pegwell Bay example shows the 3 highest ability from the 3 most consistent (Never quite seen the logic in how VDW phrased that unless they are more than 3 horses in the 3 lowest consistency figures) are also the 3 horses with the 3 highest race class ratings last time out.

VDW said isolating the class/form horse can be tricky and I think this race shows a good example whereby not only do the two highest on ability rating also feature as the same two highest last race class runners, but there is evidence to my mind that Jumbeau's last race, despite being worth less than Equity Law's last race, was the more competitive race when taking into account the previous class and form of those lining up and more importantly those who featured at the business end of the race. Indeed, several of them featured next time out in Woolhampton's class 157 race.

So, on balance my view is that Jumbeau has the better last time out run from a class and form perspective. The thing for me has been the weight issue, as both horses carried much lighter weights last time, but of course in better races. Jumbeau has gone close with similar weights to that he carries tonight, and I think it's interesting they are not using a claiming jock this time and using Tom Marquand with of course no claim.

Also, the last time SP factor is always on my mind, rightly or wrongly.

I suppose we will find out shortly.

 

[rave154]

JennyK

Initially, the Windsor 7:10 race viewed as per the Pegwell Bay example shows the 3 highest ability from the 3 most consistent (Never quite seen the logic in how VDW phrased that unless they are more than 3 horses in the 3 lowest consistency figures) are also the 3 horses with the 3 highest race class ratings last time out.

VDW said isolating the class/form horse can be tricky and I think this race shows a good example whereby not only do the two highest on ability rating also feature as the same two highest last race class runners, but there is evidence to my mind that Jumbeau's last race, despite being worth less than Equity Law's last race, was the more competitive race when taking into account the previous class and form of those lining up and more importantly those who featured at the business end of the race. Indeed, several of them featured next time out in Woolhampton's class 157 race.

So, on balance my view is that Jumbeau has the better last time out run from a class and form perspective. The thing for me has been the weight issue, as both horses carried much lighter weights last time, but of course in better races. Jumbeau has gone close with similar weights to that he carries tonight, and I think it's interesting they are not using a claiming jock this time and using Tom Marquand with of course no claim.

Also, the last time SP factor is always on my mind, rightly or wrongly.

I suppose we will find out shortly.

Initially, the Windsor 7:10 race viewed as per the Pegwell Bay example shows the 3 highest ability from the 3 most consistent (Never quite seen the logic in how VDW phrased that unless they are more than 3 horses in the 3 lowest consistency figures) are also the 3 horses with the 3 highest race class ratings last time out.

that caught my eye too at the time, taking 3 from 3 doesnt get you anywhere...unless there are more than 3 in the first group, but how often does that happen?

 

[JennyK]

T Tufnel

As I said earlier, I do not think Equity Law was the type of class/form horse VDW would have backed, because although undoubtedly a form horse, coming down in class as he was today he lacked the quality of form (assessed via the key horse) which was a characteristic of nearly all VDW's selections dropping in class.

As regards Jumbeau, he was also dropping in class but did have the quality of form. He was however well below Equity Law on ability, and I can't see a "the other factors" issue which would have led VDW to by-pass Equity Law (trip, going and weight all okay, though in the long term he may prove best on stiff courses). Although I am struggling with one (Pipsted) leaving him to one side I found an example where VDW opposed an apparent class/form horse where there was not some "other factors" negative. Thus even if he did not think Equity Law a bet, I doubt he could have backed Jumbeau against him.

I doubt weight would have been a factor with either horse. As you say, with handicappers dropping in class more weight is inevitable, but Equity Law's was well within the range any horse can be expected comfortably to carry, and as I read VDW - "horses have INDIVIDUAL weight limits beyond which THEY do not perform" (VDW's capitalisation, not mine) - I think he would have been okay with Jumbeau's today.

re consistent, I think the Mackeson illustration suggests VDW was looking for the three lowest consistency totals within the first six or so of the forecast, not the three lowest horses. In that race it gave him 3, 4 and 7. (Presumably Warner For Leisure with 6 did not feature high enough in the forecasts VDW used.) That gave him six consistent horses with the three rates and the ability ratings consideration reduced them to four.

 

[JennyK]

The race I am looking at tomorrow is the 7.50 Newbury where, from the current Post forecast, the three lowest consistency totals from within the first six, and indeed the field, are 6, 8 and 10, with one horse each, so no need to apply the "three highest ability ratings". To them (Snuggle, Strike and Hurt You Never) would be added Chasseral and Kensington Agent on the three highest AR consideration, leaving a second numerical picture of five. No way could Kensington Agent be regarded as a form horse, thus I think VDW's third numerical picture would have been:

Snuggle AR 100
Strike 77
Hurt You Never 38
Chasseral 37

At first sight, Snuggle is the class/form horse, fine on trip, going and course type. BUT carrying 10.00, not having won with more than 9.04 though a close 2nd with 9.10. Would VDW have excluded him for weight? I don't know.

If he didn't exclude Snuggle on weight, he would be the class/form horse but going up in class completely lacking the consistent form profile which characterise VDW's class-rising selections. So I am certain he would not have been a class/form horse VDW would have backed.

If VDW would have disqualified Sunggle on weight, the potential class/form horse would have been Strike, okay on trip, going and course type and, I think, on weight (thanks to the conditional).

Strike has a more acceptable lto profile for a class riser than Snuggle, though not a great one and I can only find one VDW class rising selection with a similar one, Connaught Bridge. So, if VDW would have regarded Strike and not Snuggle as the class/form horse, I am not sure he would have backed him.

Sadly, not a race where I can be sure which is the class/form horse.

 

[Tufnel]

T Tufnel

As I said earlier, I do not think Equity Law was the type of class/form horse VDW would have backed, because although undoubtedly a form horse, coming down in class as he was today he lacked the quality of form (assessed via the key horse) which was a characteristic of nearly all VDW's selections dropping in class.

As regards Jumbeau, he was also dropping in class but did have the quality of form. He was however well below Equity Law on ability, and I can't see a "the other factors" issue which would have led VDW to by-pass Equity Law (trip, going and weight all okay, though in the long term he may prove best on stiff courses). Although I am struggling with one (Pipsted) leaving him to one side I found an example where VDW opposed an apparent class/form horse where there was not some "other factors" negative. Thus even if he did not think Equity Law a bet, I doubt he could have backed Jumbeau against him.

I doubt weight would have been a factor with either horse. As you say, with handicappers dropping in class more weight is inevitable, but Equity Law's was well within the range any horse can be expected comfortably to carry, and as I read VDW - "horses have INDIVIDUAL weight limits beyond which THEY do not perform" (VDW's capitalisation, not mine) - I think he would have been okay with Jumbeau's today.

re consistent, I think the Mackeson illustration suggests VDW was looking for the three lowest consistency totals within the first six or so of the forecast, not the three lowest horses. In that race it gave him 3, 4 and 7. (Presumably Warner For Leisure with 6 did not feature high enough in the forecasts VDW used.) That gave him six consistent horses with the three rates and the ability ratings consideration reduced them to four.

Agree, the first thing that sounded the alarm bells with Equity Law for me was the quality of form of the horses concerned in the previous outing as you say. Jumbeau of course did have that going for her. Both horses were showing their improvement last time for carrying much less weight in better races, and I always find these types are troublesome unless they perhaps won a race recently with much more weight than they carried last time.

Also, as I made reference to, two of the horses Jumbeau beat last time, Navello and Thunder Moor, who finished last and second last that day, came out next time in the class 157 race that Woolhampton ran in, and of course Navello won that race with Thunder Moor a close 3rd. Squealer split them in 2nd having run in a much better race before that on seasonal debut. Woolhampton was 5/1 in that race having come from a class 386 at Newbury over 6f following it's win over 5f at Ascot in the spring.

The result makes for a confusing one if you think about it, but considering recent SPs of those involved and the factor that Woolhampton was carrying less weight tonight as opposed to much more for EL & J, perhaps there's more being missed in the form evaluation. 3rd on ability beats 2nd on ability with the top rated well out of it.

It's got me thinking anyway. In my conclusion that J had the better shout than the odds on fav, perhaps I'm guilty of being blind sided by what should have been another big danger lurking right before my eyes?

 

[Chesham]

Lipsink is the possible fly in the ointment returned to form LTO after switching to Mick Appleby on first run. Has won in higher class and off a higher OR . Carries weight well too

Looks 8 lb well in on TheBluesBrother Handicap and ran the best Speed Rating of the meeting







Not a betting race bit with Lipsink in the race it’s BLA

 

[JennyK]

T Tufnel

I agree a case can be made for Woolhampton, but aside from the fact that on VDW's ability rating he was well behind Equity Law and a bit behind Jumbeau, his form, for a horse dropping in class, is no better supported key horse-wise than Equity Law's.

Sadly, everything does not line up as one would wish very often, which I suppose is why VDW suggested supporting those which "stick out like a sore thumb", advice that Lee both explicitly endorsed and put into practice.

If we take Lee's examples of pre-race posted class-dropping Flat selections, all on the Gummy archive available on this forum, all six won. In each case the key horse for his selection's last race had been one of the first three in the betting (ie expected to win or go close) and in five cases they had won or been placed in their previous races when also favourite or near favourite. The exception, Countdown whom Lee posted on 04/07/04, is one I haven't fully fathomed.

So with class droppers, I think the "sore thumbs" are ones with last race form profiles, key horse-wise, like Jumbeau's but not facing form horses better on ability. Hopefully one like that will crop up soon, but not alas in the race I am looking at tomorrow.

 

[Tufnel]

The race I am looking at tomorrow is the 7.50 Newbury where, from the current Post forecast, the three lowest consistency totals from within the first six, and indeed the field, are 6, 8 and 10, with one horse each, so no need to apply the "three highest ability ratings". To them (Snuggle, Strike and Hurt You Never) would be added Chasseral and Kensington Agent on the three highest AR consideration, leaving a second numerical picture of five. No way could Kensington Agent be regarded as a form horse, thus I think VDW's third numerical picture would have been:

Snuggle AR 100
Strike 77
Hurt You Never 38
Chasseral 37

At first sight, Snuggle is the class/form horse, fine on trip, going and course type. BUT carrying 10.00, not having won with more than 9.04 though a close 2nd with 9.10. Would VDW have excluded him for weight? I don't know.

If he didn't exclude Snuggle on weight, he would be the class/form horse but going up in class completely lacking the consistent form profile which characterise VDW's class-rising selections. So I am certain he would not have been a class/form horse VDW would have backed.

If VDW would have disqualified Sunggle on weight, the potential class/form horse would have been Strike, okay on trip, going and course type and, I think, on weight (thanks to the conditional).

Strike has a more acceptable lto profile for a class riser than Snuggle, though not a great one and I can only find one VDW class rising selection with a similar one, Connaught Bridge. So, if VDW would have regarded Strike and not Snuggle as the class/form horse, I am not sure he would have backed him.

Sadly, not a race where I can be sure which is the class/form horse.

There's quite a lot of conflict in this race. Nothing has really been running in significantly better class, though there are several horses in here who are looking well treated on past exploits (Chasseral, Snuggle, Lipsink and even Kodi Red). But in that respect, I think that's been more out of declining form rather than any great plan on any trainer's part.

I agree Strike looks to have a reasonable chance, but not an outstanding one by comparison to several others. Few of the form lines involved with the shortlisted horses above seem good consistent, etc. Though the horse that Hurt You Never beat quite convincingly last time has won twice since off 1lb and 6lb higher respectively and 6th placed Mrs Trump won another race next time out also.

Snuggle's last race possibly could be better than might appear, as the winner was a lightly raced Stoute horse dropping in trip and was rated 82 just a few runs back. The 2nd horse that split them though hasn't won for just over a year but at least it was in better class than this. But much the same can be said about the 2 horses who beat Strike last time, except for the lightly race part.

But it's all fairly low key stuff. It wouldn't surprise me if any of the above mentioned won the race.

 

[Michael231]

In the case of Woolhampton last night it did run at some classy tracks before and ran with credit ratings going up and could say was primed for the race but hind sight is a wonderful thing, it would have been a handicap pick for me if I'd looked at it in more detail but with family ,dentist and being the taxi for people didn't get much time, although Jumbeau was my pick that I put up on the competition.

 

[JennyK]

Tomorrow's veterans' sprint isn't of much interest to me but it is Carlisle Bell day, the Bell being one of the non-sprint handicaps I like to analyse.

I think VDW's third numerical picture would have been:

Dawn Of Liberation AR 87

Mostawaa 76 (won the Bell last year)

BillyB 68

All are up in class on penalty value, but on quality of field Dawn Of Liberation comes from a much classier one (on the average OR basis) and carries 10.00. No handicap wins so far, but tried in high class ones by previous trainer and maybe showed something for Ruth Carr lto.

On an obvious form basis none of the three has a good profile via the key horse lto, but I will be assessing Mostawaa on the basis of his less obvious form.

I'm not sure but I think VDW might have treated Dawn Of Liberation as he did Balmers Coombe, but it is not as clear cut. So again I am not sure which would have been his class form horse; Dawn Of Liberation or Mostawaa. If the former, I am reasonably sure he would not have backed it. If Mostawaa, possibly he might though not a "sore thumb".

 

[Chesham]

This VDW Example was not noted as quickening, but is a good example of “GAP TO CLOSE”


It may help to read the race comments when Braashee beat Cossack Guard. Prior to their Ascot meeting.

Braashee held up, headway over 2f out, led over 1f out, pushed out
Cossack Guard 3rd straight, led over 3f out until over 1f out, ran on well


When Cossack Guard met Braashee at Newbury, he was going down in class from 693 to 204 and did not manage to beat Brashee who was going up in class from 25 to 204 VDW would see this as a negative for Cossack Gaurd, dropped in class but beaten by a horse going up massively in class.

VDW advises to look at how they perform in the last 2 furlongs.

At the 2f Pole in the Newbury race Cossack Gaurd was in front and the performance of Brasashee was far superior as he had to make up the ground on Cossack Gaurd and pass him to win.
Braashee passed him at the 1f pole, until then Cossack Gaurd had been leading from 3f out. To make up the ground Braashee would have been travelling faster than Cossack Guard and was merely pushed out which indicates that there was plenty left in the locker to beat Cossack Guard again. (Pace & Stamina)

 

[Chesham]

I feel more confident with a selection if the Word Headway appears in the form


Recent example and posted on The Blog Pre Race was Lennon

carried less weight than LTO, because of weight for age amd was in a 3YO only Handicap Last time out. Lbs well in on TheBluesBrother LTO results sheet

LTO Form

making handicap debut, after 6 months off, proved a different proposition to his 3 starts as a juvenile, knuckling down well to peg back a more battle-hardened rival; dwelt, held up, headway out wide around 2f out, edged left final 1f, stayed on to lead final 50 yds;

Ask The Coach Driver

 

[JennyK]

Some posts by Lee, twenty years or so ago, on the Gummy forum.

He posted a sentence from the well-known "Spells It All Out" article and added the caspitalisation:

"To confirm what the figures say it is necessary to study the form of all concerned, taking particular note of the 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."

He added, ".... it's working out what VDW meant by his reference that's important, and one will never unravel the answer without the form, simple as that.”

Another poster whether the idea capitalised could be found in the post-race comments.

Lee: “No, it has everything to do with form i.e. a horse’s performance, but not in the way that is touted around on here.

After race comments also have no bearing whatsoever, bar of course stated facts such as the horse was reported lame after a race and such like.”

Lee later modified this position:

“Of course, the race-readers comments can be telling, however, they need balancing against other factors. It is the latter stages of the race that are important, and what a horse does or doesn't do at this stage will give the answers. VDW's method of gauging one performance against another, from the distance, is the key.”

 

[Chesham]

it’s worth watching where Naval Academy is going to be placed

Was giving 16 Lb to an improving Lennon. Obvious route would be a 4 YO + Handicap and would carry less physical weight

The Trainer has nearly 2 weeks to find a race the Handicapper raises its OR as the race was on a Sunday amd it will be a week tomorrow before the new PRbis uprated and until Saturday next week before the new Mark kicks in

TheBluesBrother has NA 17 Lb better than its OR for Sundays performance