• 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

VDW VDW Numbers - Code to Code?

Celticshadow

Celticshadow

Yearling
Hi Chaps

Just wondered with regard to the "Erin" figures and VDW "consistency" figures whether you are using code to code figures or just using figures as is? For example today (and there are plenty every day and with most valuable races) in the 1.15pm at Haydock Calculated Risk last three races were on the flat and last NHH was back in March this year, also in the same race Viva Colonia last ran a hurdle race back in December 2011.

Kind Regards

Paul
 
Hi Paul your question is a good one and highlights that even forming the basic consistency fig often needs some thought and personal opinion RE each of the individual past three races.For the race you mention the way i would play it would be to use the later NH races but if the horse then showed as one of the probables be prepared to question and challenge the fig how when and why they where gained and with what relevance to today's race.I think this was what the guy wished us to do with most of the ideas he presented.Take nothing at face value.

With perhaps the best advise being wait until everything lines up before betting.
 
Hi Mick

Many thanks for replying, however I my query is toward the "Erin nos and the VDW consistency figures" and not the last three form figs that appear in the form line of each and every race card. As the quoted numbers are more involved so to speak I was wondering if those whom know and use them practice code to code or mix and match as they come?

I would also like to pass on my concerns and best wishes to Mtoto and hope that all is well. I spoke with him some time back and a most affable chap and character he is.

Kind Regards

Paul
 
I have tried separating codes and ignoring code changes but,for me it has worked best when taken on a race by race basis.The age of the form is important to me personally but, the emphasis for me is the most recent as this is what tells me if it has the ability to be up to the task at hand.

It is my belief that although appearances in another code may be just the trainer giving the horse other options for development,it may also be a clever way of hiding potential during development.
 
Hi DBMB

Is there any evidence that vdw ignored or noted code to code as either way having done the mechanical part one could quite easily NOT have the same horses as himself from which to make final decisions?

Kind Regards

Paul
 
I do wonder what his take would have been RE the AW.It would have been interesting to read his views on same.Likewise it would be good to know if any members have or do apply the method to AW racing.?
 
For me the 'mechanical part' is nothing more than a means to quickly assess if I will look at the race closer.A method of short-listing if you like.
 
DBMB said:
For me the 'mechanical part' is nothing more than a means to quickly assess if I will look at the race closer.A method of short-listing if you like.
Click to expand...
Yes i always took his message to mean that if in to much conflict then swerve and i would say that's good advise.
 
Bobajobber said:
Celticshadow Celticshadow

Personally I would not mix flat with jumps.

You can though observe if the form is getting good to see if the horse will have any fitness advantage
Click to expand...

Hi Bobajobber

I would tend to agree except with hurdles and flat in regard to speed figs but that is outside of vdw for me and another discussion. However what is the position with regard to hurdles and chase if last three or five were one or the other does one take code to code (ie just hurdle or just chase) or take it as it is presented? Is the evidence the last three regardless, or code to code. Personally I prefer code to code but what should the official position be?

Kind Regards

Paul
 
The AR is generated from both hurdles and chases
VDW gave a comprehensive explanation about deriving Little Owl's AR which included its Hurdle wins.

formtheory formtheory gave the name of a horse who won LTO called Bold Henry who had won a Chase recently, but his race prior was hurdle and he finished down the field , but it was more a race for fitness.
Personally I do not think it is bad to intertwine hurdles with chases, they are distance races and chase are bigger, common sense when reading the form will show you the path to go, if a horse runs several races and then shows up in a hurdle, he is either rated better over hurdles or the horse has lost his way over chases or generally need to get fit, his form should tell you this.
McCain had a horse run at Market Rasen hurdles prior to winning the Northumbrian plate at Newcastle , I cannot remember the horse , but it sticks in the mind, continuity of form, or consistent form, remember a horse winning a 6 f race LTO would struggle over further.

Hope this helps
 
VDW defiantly said use hurdle and chase wins when formulating the AR. For me that is a major mistake that to often gives a false reading of a horses ability. How many times do we see top class hurdlers that fail over the big fences. For me the two are very separate disciplines and should be judged separately, for me the difference is as marked as using flat form/ability over the hurdles. Just because a horse can hurdle why would you assume it can cope with fences the jumping technique is very different. Just wait until the horse has proved itself over the required discipline.

I have no problem using the different codes when working out consistency, and probables but never judge ability using the different codes

Be Lucky
 
mtoto mtoto
Apologies , I cannot make sense you telling us that VDW said to use both hurdles and chases and then defiantly easily separate them, my argument to that was VDW created that rating whether you accept that or not.
Yet another piece of VDW picture you easily dismiss, it begs the question is it really VDW that you are following.

Please do not take this the wrong way, it just appears like this
 
Last edited:
Apologies , I cannot make sense you telling us that VDW said to use both hurdles and chases and then defiantly easily separate them, my argument to that was VDW created that rating whether you accept that or not.
Yet another piece of VDW picture you easily dismiss, it begs the question is it really VDW that you are following.

Bobba,

Sorry but you have lost me, I agreed VDW said use hurdle and chase form when formulating the AR and as I explained I think it is a big mistake and I gave my reasons why I think that. If the AR is a measurement of ability why would you want to separate the rating ?

Yet another piece of VDW picture you easily dismiss, it begs the question is it really VDW that you are following.

Again I don't understand why you think I easily dismissed anything. I took a HARD look at this simple measurement of ability, simple is VDW expression not mine, and decided it had too many flaws to be accurate. Even VDW pointed out one flaw Often this is a race offering less prize money, but not necessarily so.The quality of the horses engaged is more to the point. I then followed VDW advice as shown below

For now I say to you, "Don't accept a word I have written, prove it first for yourself, then and only then will you have started along that narrow road to your
goal through the process of acquiring that first indispensable asset... TEMPERAMENT."

Be Lucky
 
Last edited:
mtoto mtoto
This is your quote
mtoto said:
VDW defiantly said use hurdle and chase wins when formulating the AR.
Click to expand...
If VDW believes what you are suggesting in your quote, why would YOU completely ignore?
Your VDW quotation posts have no bearing on the matter.
"I did not say anything for the sake of it", show us anywhere in the books where VDW does or tells us to separate what you are suggesting, if you cannot find it, then surely you have made this up to create the 'Mtoto' Method
 
Last edited:
One of the things i always respected about VDW was that he was prepared to question or challenge his own figs.So even the basic AR and CR needed to be investigated to seek confirmation or not of what they where saying.= HARD WORK ?

I do not tend to work or bet in the highest class races which he advised so do not know if my thoughts are as relevant but RE mixed code if a chaser ran in a hurdle lto why.? A confidence boost after some poor jumping or fall.To gain a fitness edge prior to target chase win without giving anything away.With serious intent to win because the Hurdle OR is now much lower than the chase one.There are all sorts of reasons which need to be investigated on an individual bases before a positive conclusion can be drawn.
 
If VDW believes what you are suggesting in your quote, why would YOU completely ignore?

Bobba,
I have tried to explain why I don't use the AR. While I happen to think VDW had a good grip on racing, I don't agree with all his ideas I have a mind of my own. As explained I have seen too many times top hurdlers that are given FALSE AR's when using their hurdle form over chases. As previously explained I use the speed merit method of measuring ability so I can see no way you can say I'm using the MTOTO method it is VDW pure and simple. As you pointed out VDW didn't say things for the sake of it, He suggested using Split Seconds s/f when using the speed merit method, split second has SEPARATE figures for hurdles and chases so when he said a figure of 80 is a good way to establish proven ability common sense says that is restricted to the discipline in question.

Your VDW quotation posts have no bearing on the matter.

They may not have any bearing for you but they are an attempt to explain why I don't use the AR and think it is at best a simple cross check. And the other quote was trying to explain VDW wanted us to think for ourselves and not just take his word for anything.

Be Lucky
 
I am going to give an opinion which might get me some flack but it is an honest and well intended one.I suspect that there is no one who has been able to interpret the VDW words in a way which enables them to find the same horses and produce similar results today as he did then. Frustrating as this can be when you feel you have give it your best shot there are still many positives to take from the effort as we do learn along the way aspects of his teachings which we can put to good and profitable use in our own way and surely this is all that matters.?

I find fascination with the man himself as what where his true intentions.? The early letters dangled a wonderful bait but eventually resulted in loss of interest when people could not get the same to work for future races.So he then felt the need to write to himself via G Hall in order to reignite interest which worked very well but also caused a similar problem.?

I can understand his possible reasoning that he expected followers to put in the effort to become enlightened yet when all the feed back i saw continued to be negative in this respect you have to wonder what purpose in then continuing to write in riddles about his method which could have been explained in a way which people would have understood and been able to use.

The other thing i could never understand at the time and still do not is that he could have negated all the negativity just by providing a few pre race selections yet always chose to swerve this.

Anyway i still feel gratitude towards the guy who obviously had a great insight but cannot help but wonder RE his real intended purpose or legacy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top