A method

But then he introduced his method for assessing a horse's ability. As far as I am aware, he was the first to do so - previously the notion of ability was a matter of personal opinion, but the Dutchman changed all that.

to be fair its just a different form of EPS [earnings per start.. Tanlic;)]......Americans been using that since Savile were a lad...VDW did earnings per win instead.....EPW Tanlic :)

eps is actually better..as it measures consistency and class..two things all VDWers love
 
Last edited:
swedish chef said:
Van Der Wheil, or the Flying Dutchman as he was also called? He first made his impact on the British betting scene in the letters page of the old Handicap Book in 1980. His letters continued all through the 80's - informative, challenging, and also provoking a great deal of heated discussion.
Click to expand...

Informative? I don't think so. He talked tripe and was the king of aftertimers. Never expressed an opinion in advance of a race. Simon Rowlands got involved in a debate on TRF once with some of VDW's "followers" and compared it to arguing with the Moonies.
 
davids2009 said:
Sounds interesting but as with all things like this it is only half complete as no comparison is done against prices on offer which will mean this is effectively betting blind. Taking extremes would you back all top rated at 1/4? There has to be some price comparison to be successful. You could have excellent horse racing analysis but it won't benefit you until you add in the additional step of making selections based on prices.

If all your top rated are 10/1+ then you probably will do ok but as soon as they start getting shorter you need to know if the prices are worth it.
Click to expand...

Simply put, I would not back anything before the race at odds on. It must be said though that anything selected by this method that is a relatively short price probably deserves to be.
 
icebreaker said:
A Form evaluation method that claimed to pinpoint if there might be a winner in a particular race ( a decent-Class race).
It originated in the letter page of the old Sporting Chronicle Handicap Book; I remember well the heated debate it caused.
To this day I remain convinced that Van Der Wheil was a construct -- and the alias of -- the editor of the Handicap Book's letter page in order to generate controversy and subsequent sales of the paper. ( Was his name Tom Ryan, I'm not sure I recall correctly?)

Anyway, google Van Der Wheil -- there's loads of stuff on the intarweb about the method.
Click to expand...

Tony Peach
 
swedish chef said:
Van Der Wheil, or the Flying Dutchman as he was also called? He first made his impact on the British betting scene in the letters page of the old Handicap Book in 1980. His letters continued all through the 80's - informative, challenging, and also provoking a great deal of heated discussion.
VDW was a great believer in consistent form; nothing very startling in that. He looked for his winners from the first four or five horses quoted in a reliable betting forecast. Again not the most revolutionary idea in the betting world. But then he introduced his method for assessing a horse's ability. As far as I am aware, he was the first to do so - previously the notion of ability was a matter of personal opinion, but the Dutchman changed all that.

He was able to give ability a numerical value, based on facts not opinions, and in the intervening years a whole anthology of systems has been spawned using the VDW factor for ability as the main source of inspiration. And what was this ability rating? For anyone who may still be in doubt, here is the VDW secret.
He added up the amount of money a horse had won for winning races (not for being placed), divided this by the number of races won and then knocked off the final two figures. The resulting number is the horse's ability rating. So, if a horse has won £50,000 in five races, then it has an ability rating of 100, or if another has won £88,000 in eight races, its rating would be 110, that is ten points superior to the first one. Fortunately, all the figures required for working out the ratings are supplied in a convenient way in the Racing Post.
The only races VDW used with his method were high-value ones with medium sized fields.

Regarding consistent form, taken over a horse's last three runs, VDW simply added the form figures together, so that 111 gave a rating of 3, the most consistent, and 000 a rating of 30, the least. Therefore, taking the first five horses in the betting forecast, he would work out the three most consistent and if one of these had the highest ability rating, then that was a possible bet. But there was more to it than that. There was always talk of a 'missing link' which caused endless discussion and argument in the Handicap Book's correspondence page. What the link was I have never been able to work out. Perhaps there wasn't one, unless it might be the individual temperament of each punter. VDW once gave his complete formula, as follows: - Consistent Form + Ability + Capability + Profitability + Hard Work = Winners.
Click to expand...

A good precis Swedish.:thumbsup: However, no-one should take anything at face value. They'd prob lose following those guidlines strictly. What one must do is twist/tweak/torture until you unearth the method that suits you. I've done that and have two. One for these types of races and one for more valuable h/caps with more runners. I'll start another thread for those.
 
swedish chef said:
His letters continued all through the 80's - informative, challenging, and also provoking a great deal of heated discussion.
VDW was a great believer in consistent form; nothing very startling in that.
Click to expand...
................. etc, etc.

Can I ask, is the above of your own composition or have you sourced it from somewhere else?
 
15:10 Lingfield Park

Full result
1st 6 Lord of The Dance (IRE) 20/1
2nd 7 West Leake (IRE) 6/1
3rd 1 Elusive Hawk (IRE) 6/4 f
 
EC1 said:
you been punting since the sixties and didn't know what VDW was??

did you never buy the handicap book newspaper each week in the 70's?;)
Click to expand...

As a 15 year old lad I had the Sporting Chronicle and the Racing Weekender and Horse and Hounds when I went to the dentist. I never heard of VDW I thoiught when I saw it he was talking about a Volkswagen :D

The handicap book rings a bell but that's about it. I was more hands on. First race horse I saw up close was Bel Canto at Harry Bell's yard and within months I was riding out 3 lots every day for Rhona Oliver including old regulars like Fiddler on the Hoof and Treggaron so I learned the game from the inside so books weren't much used to me.
 
icebreaker said:
................. etc, etc.

Can I ask, is the above of your own composition or have you sourced it from somewhere else?
Click to expand...

Had this discussion on another forum last year and we tried to revive it and tweak it. Please note none of this work was done by myself. It had it's up and downs and certainly found some big price winners but overall P/L was small profit. If VM has tweaked it to make it profitable then I will watch with interest and keep an open mind.

http://www.bettingsystemprofessional.com/2011/07/racereader-plus.html

http://vanderwheil.com/

Couple of examples:

CATTERICK 2.15 - 10-01-13

PENTIFFIC
18-315-99-77-123-1-6-4-4
CLOUDY TOO
11-38-109-38-110-5-7-7-5
NIGHT IN MILAN
7-37-106-129-32-7-5-3-3
LIVELY BARON
5-58-115-157-133-1-1-1
ANY CURRENCY
11-95-115-619-138-5-2-6-2
DESPERATE DEX
4-28-98-101-114-1-4-2-7
JAUNTY JOURNEY
9-36-94-162-117-5-3-5-6

A load of gobbldegook? Certainly unless I explain each number.
The seven horses are amongst the first six in the betting. Two have the same price hence seven horses.

First Number is VDW Consistency rating
Second Number VDW Ability rating
Third Number is Weights Right Rating
Fourth Number is Penalty Value of Last race
Fifth Number is the average OR for that race
Sixth Number is the position in the betting for the last race
Seventh , Eighth and Ninth numbers are the positions in three sets of different form ratings if these seven were the only runners in the race.

One horse stands out, Lively Baron who is the only horses amongst the top 3 rated of every discipline. These are his positions; 1-3-1-3-1-1-1-1.


He will handle the distance, he will handle the ground and he should handle the physical weight.
Maguire is 5-9 on the horses and McCain is in form.

Unplaced @ 15/2
-----------------------------------------------------------------

WOLVERHAMPTON 3.35 - 10-01-13

SAOI
14-38-68-23-73-1-1-1
KNOWE HEAD
8-29-63-30-70-2-2-2
AVAILED SPEAKER
22-23-48-25-68-4-3-4
FAME AGAIN
14-25-623-29-68-5-5-3
CANARY WHARF
18-23-68-40-78-3-4-5

With Saoi returning figures of 2-1-1-5-2-1-1-1 and Knowe Head 1-2-3-2-3-2-2-2, it looks likely they will fight out the finish.

Saoi is 0-2 in class 4 and has never run at Wolverhampton before. However, he is showing improvement in the hood and he may well collect.
Knowe Head is 3-12 over course and distance and has shown improvement in the visor.

1st & 2nd @ 7/4 & 5/1 hd between them
 
Bit harsh on satwa laird though, seemed to me to be going best around the top bend until the jockey less horse took them wide! Gutted as I picked it on another thread.
 
LOL...a true sceptic...no..too dangerous'
Just keep an eye on this thread. ONE selection. NO fudging. NO aftertiming.
Politeness and replies when needed. All in all, just the sort of poster needed on every forum. Constant carping is not appreciated. Constuctive criticism is. :)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top