• Hi Guest Just in case you were not aware I wanted to highlight that you can now get a free 7 day trial of Horseracebase here.
    We have a lot of members who are existing users of Horseracebase so help is always available if needed, as well as dedicated section of the fourm here.
    Best Wishes
    AR

Sorting A Card Out

I've looked at the Carlisle card today. I don't know as to if I've actually "sorted" it out, but here are the ones I think VDW would have been giving further consideration to.
3:18 Eye Of Dubai
4:20 Rory + American Star
4:50 Golden Melody
5:25 Distinction

I'll watch with interest to see how they get on.
 
Newbury
5:55 Miguel + American Bay + Bona Fortuna
Of those 3 I'd say they'd have been preferred in that order of merit. But it's a watching brief for now.
 
T Tufnel

Thanks, I've found it. He writes "methods of sorting a card out", plural, which suggests that the six selections may well have been found by more than one method. On the other hand, he also wrote "Perhaps one day I'll write another book and include it" - singular - which would be right for method, singular, but not methods, plural, where "them" would be more appropriate.

Maybe I am falling into the error of over-interpreting something which, for all we know, might have been dashed off while VDW was half-listening to the television!
 
It's been pretty dismal so far, and looking again at the 5:55 I'd have to say it would be American Bay with Bona Fortuna, with Miguel out of it.
Just thinking out loud hear, but I seem to be including KH form that doesn't involve winners. Find out in 5 minutes or so if this is just another duff decision.
 
JennyK said:
T Tufnel

Thanks, I've found it. He writes "methods of sorting a card out", plural, which suggests that the six selections may well have been found by more than one method. On the other hand, he also wrote "Perhaps one day I'll write another book and include it" - singular - which would be right for method, singular, but not methods, plural, where "them" would be more appropriate.

Maybe I am falling into the error of over-interpreting something which, for all we know, might have been dashed off while VDW was half-listening to the television!
Click to expand...
Yes, I looked closely at his handwriting to see if he meant method or methods. Does look like a small s on the end of his first mention.
 
Even allowing for the woefully lame ride Dobbs gave to American Bay in 4th, it seems either I'm completely missing a key element here or Hall was just leading us a merry dance again.

Next at Southwell Kodi Lion +. Racingbreaks Ryder
 
One of my high strike filters has a runner this evening. Warmonger in the 7:12 at Southwell. Short enough but last time's SP was a bonus really.

I'll have to go back to the drawing board again with this sorting a card approach. I do still keep recalling his emphasising of the word LOOK when remarking upon how he thinks the most people "have little idea how to LOOK at a card properly".

Now he could have said how to "read" or "evaluate" perhaps. But he says "look". Which suggests his initial line of investigation is something visual on the race card.

I'll think on.

Meanwhile fingers crossed Warmonger will reward some patience today. I think it's a good thing personally.
 
T Tufnel

95% of the time I analyse sprint handicaps and so today was interested in the two at Southwell (6.43 and 8.40).

If you didn't look at them earlier, they are worth checking out from the pre best bet/next bet methodology. I think you'll find Thunder Moor's profile particularly interesting from the trip perspective.
 
Yes, looks like the step up to 6f with a 7lb claimer last time behind Elmonjed was a bit of training before the step back to 5.
Note he also won a very similar race to today's last Sept over C&D.
Unfortunately I didn't go into too much depth on the Southwell card beyond the couple of races I mentioned.
 
I think looking at the card properly is easy to be fair, But is only the start which can be done in a relaxed manner over coffee with out any pressure.
Lets look at sandown today and i just picked any meeting coud have been any one.
1 50 This is a nursery where the fav has even only won a maiden with some horses just handicapped must leave alone.
2 25 This race is sprint handicap where all the horses have form and the three year olds all big prices so looks like could be interesting to look at.
Third fav not raced for long time could be worry to all form.
3 00 This is maiden race with no form to go on so apart from looking like first timer winner would not touch .
3 30 This is a 3yold race but the fancied ones seem to have enough form to at least look into later.
4 00 This handicap has got the three year olds well up in betting this time, but one where no handicap form so risky to be confident.
4 35 Mixed bag handicap here where would be foolish to discount some hidden in there, I would not feel comfortable.

So looking at that i would even only think the 2 25 and the 3 30 are the races to study rest leave and will do two things save time and rest the brain alot more which is crucial in study as we do put mind through alot of guessing.

For what its worth the one at this meeting that looked really interesting was glamourous express in the 2 25 stepping up in prize money last three races and according to rpr improving every time and yet dropping in mark every time too.
And rossa ryan on it also massive plus only negative is the weight was dropping now went back up, But did win at newcastle with 9 13 on its back.
 
As we all know, it's pretty much beyond doubt that GR of Lincs was Hall pretending to be somebody else again. And that letter in Sept 1996 mentions some points that VDW referred to in his personal letters to Peach.

There's a point where he talks about how VDW "giving us more than we could cope with." Which harks back to what he said to Peach in one of those letters written in Feb earlier that year about splashing the whole lot in front of readers would have been pointless and only a fraction of his knowledge had been revealed at the time Peach called a halt to letters in the SF (around 1987/88).

If you look at those selections listed in the GR letter, there's a lot of handicap winners and he tells us which races he avoids. Though the comment about Epsom and Lingfield doesn't ring true to me, but putting that to one side for now, it's clear from the horses listed that it was handicaps and better class conditions races. Mark Of Esteem and Hagwah being the only non handicap selections.

There is also a marked bias towards the top 3 or 4 in the weights of the handicap selections, a point I've looked at before in relation to the Best Bet/Next Best selections from the VDW/Peach letters. Arthur's Minstrel 3rd in the weights, Ever Smile 3rd in the weights. And the other 2 handicap bets Rivage Bleu and Killeshin were carrying the minimum weight or less.

The GR handicap bets were
Wildwood Flower (Top weight of 16 runners 9-12)
Whittle Rock (8th in weights of 16 runners with 9-1)
Orchestra Stall (Joint 4th in weights of 10 with 9-0)
Select Few (2nd in weights of 13 runners with 9-5)
Chris's Lad (2nd in weights of 11 runners with 9-8)
Squire Corrie (9th of weights of 15 runners with 8-9 before 7lb claim)
Crowded Avenue (Joint 2nd in weights of 13 runners with 9-5)
Ninia (3rd in weights of 20 runners with 9-5)

There are also several horses such as Select Few, Mark Of Esteem & Orchestra Hall who had run below expectations last time out and had been off the track for a couple of months or more.

Looking at these selections last time runs and the key horses, there wasn't anything special in their profiles. Class level seemed to be punctuated by the difference in weight carried between runs. Horses dropping in class are almost always going to be carrying more weight than last time due to running against lower BHA rated horses. Which is obvious really.

He didn't name the 2 losers, but it seems clear which meeting they were at given how he listed the selections in meeting order. And it's not too difficult to work out which races they were in. Identifying the 2 horses though is tricky.

I think these selections have more in common with the 6 best bet/next best selections and given they were selected in the same 12 month period as those 6, it seems this is where VDW was at with his bets. If indeed they were bets and not back fitted after the events?
 
gerry said:
I think looking at the card properly is easy to be fair, But is only the start which can be done in a relaxed manner over coffee with out any pressure.
Lets look at sandown today and i just picked any meeting coud have been any one.
1 50 This is a nursery where the fav has even only won a maiden with some horses just handicapped must leave alone.
2 25 This race is sprint handicap where all the horses have form and the three year olds all big prices so looks like could be interesting to look at.
Third fav not raced for long time could be worry to all form.
3 00 This is maiden race with no form to go on so apart from looking like first timer winner would not touch .
3 30 This is a 3yold race but the fancied ones seem to have enough form to at least look into later.
4 00 This handicap has got the three year olds well up in betting this time, but one where no handicap form so risky to be confident.
4 35 Mixed bag handicap here where would be foolish to discount some hidden in there, I would not feel comfortable.

So looking at that i would even only think the 2 25 and the 3 30 are the races to study rest leave and will do two things save time and rest the brain alot more which is crucial in study as we do put mind through alot of guessing.

For what its worth the one at this meeting that looked really interesting was glamourous express in the 2 25 stepping up in prize money last three races and according to rpr improving every time and yet dropping in mark every time too.
And rossa ryan on it also massive plus only negative is the weight was dropping now went back up, But did win at newcastle with 9 13 on its back.
Click to expand...
2:25 Harb and For Adaay on my shortlist
 
Nellsman Nellsman

I drew attention to the two Southwell races because in my view they are excellent examples of the potency of the class/form horse as VDW defined it, not retrospectively to claim selections I did not post prior to the races concerned.

Not that, even with what VDW told us, the class/form horse is necessarily easy to identify. The Southwell races were in my view relatively straightforward in that respect but VDW warned us that "to isolate the "class/form" horse can often prove a tricky problem". It certainly has for me in the only race I've studied today, the 3.15 Thirsk, where I am far from sure which it is.


T Tufnel

I had a quick glance through my notes on the best bet/next bet six, but will leave a more substantial look until the turf season winds down. However radically different VDW's approach was with them remains to be determined, but:

all six meet what, in practice (ie as observable in his examples) seem to have been his parameters and policies regarding consistency

four were "form" horses on what seems to have been his way of rating form status

one (Arthurs Minstrel) can be viewed as an example of what he described as "less obvious form",

So five were potentially findable without resort to anything outwith his usual lines of analysis (though made much easier in some cases if by then he was availing himself of the opportunities that the ready availability of information about ORs opened up).

One seems to me completely obscure - Rivage Bleu. Yes, we can all make positive observations relating to him - that his defeats were not as bad as they seemed because he was running from out of the handicap, that the key horses in various races had good prior form, and of course that the last race key horse had won again before Rivage Bleu's win. All true. But I can see nothing in his career which (a) provides a basis using the known VDW lines of analysis which would lead one to make him a selection and (b) indicates that the trainer "TOLD" us that the horse was "REALLY OUT TO WIN" (unlike the coupled example, Prominent King, where one can reasonably say the trainer did).

I am thus currently forced to agree with you that there must be a quite radically different approach in play, albeit one that in five out of six examples produced the same selections as one might reasonably have found using the better known VDW lines of analysis.

"As we all know, it's pretty much beyond doubt that GR of Lincs was Hall pretending to be somebody else again."

That has certainly been suggested and some clearly believe it, but personally I doubt it was the case and certainly don't assume the examples GR of Lincs gave can be used in the same way as those in "G Hall, Lincoln"'s letter published on 11/01/79.
 
JennyK said:
Nellsman Nellsman

I drew attention to the two Southwell races because in my view they are excellent examples of the potency of the class/form horse as VDW defined it, not retrospectively to claim selections I did not post prior to the races concerned.

Not that, even with what VDW told us, the class/form horse is necessarily easy to identify. The Southwell races were in my view relatively straightforward in that respect but VDW warned us that "to isolate the "class/form" horse can often prove a tricky problem". It certainly has for me in the only race I've studied today, the 3.15 Thirsk, where I am far from sure which it is.


T Tufnel

I had a quick glance through my notes on the best bet/next bet six, but will leave a more substantial look until the turf season winds down. However radically different VDW's approach was with them remains to be determined, but:

all six meet what, in practice (ie as observable in his examples) seem to have been his parameters and policies regarding consistency

four were "form" horses on what seems to have been his way of rating form status

one (Arthurs Minstrel) can be viewed as an example of what he described as "less obvious form",

So five were potentially findable without resort to anything outwith his usual lines of analysis (though made much easier in some cases if by then he was availing himself of the opportunities that the ready availability of information about ORs opened up).

One seems to me completely obscure - Rivage Bleu. Yes, we can all make positive observations relating to him - that his defeats were not as bad as they seemed because he was running from out of the handicap, that the key horses in various races had good prior form, and of course that the last race key horse had won again before Rivage Bleu's win. All true. But I can see nothing in his career which (a) provides a basis using the known VDW lines of analysis which would lead one to make him a selection and (b) indicates that the trainer "TOLD" us that the horse was "REALLY OUT TO WIN" (unlike the coupled example, Prominent King, where one can reasonably say the trainer did).

I am thus currently forced to agree with you that there must be a quite radically different approach in play, albeit one that in five out of six examples produced the same selections as one might reasonably have found using the better known VDW lines of analysis.

"As we all know, it's pretty much beyond doubt that GR of Lincs was Hall pretending to be somebody else again."

That has certainly been suggested and some clearly believe it, but personally I doubt it was the case and certainly don't assume the examples GR of Lincs gave can be used in the same way as those in "G Hall, Lincoln"'s letter published on 11/01/79.
Click to expand...
I'm a little surprised that you doubt the GR Lincs letter is not Mr Hall under yet another alias, although tbf in this case it is likely very close to his real name and known locations.

I say this because only part of those letters from VDW to Peach in Nov 95 and Feb 96 were printed and published by Peach, and it does seem strange that a letter such as the GR from Lincs one suddenly appears after a few years of inactivity with several big priced handicap winners claimed in just a few days over the August Bank Holiday weekend.

If it wasn't VDW himself, then perhaps someone who knew his identity, but the letter was clearly aimed at trying to prove that anyone could decipher what VDW wrote and make it work, that he was far above the rest of us with his knowledge of racing and even a partner who was exacerbated with the losing could be eventually persuaded VDW had the answers.

I'd be very surprised if GR wasn't G Hall.
 
I think I just left and watched an Ever Smile type situation unfold at Fontwell. The price wasn't as tasty as ES but even so, it would have been welcome.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top