Free newsletter sign up

Get our latest horse racing news, reviews, exclusives and more direct to your email inbox.
Sign up here

PP Blog

Read our Horse Racing Blog, keeping you up to date with all the latest horse race betting info & horse racing systems.

PP TV

Watch the TVN coverage of today's horse racing and view video replays through BigPond.

PP Radio

Listen to the day's racing through Sky Racing Radio. Plus racing news, previews and horse racing tips.

Mysteries of the Wheil

More light on racing's man of shadows

By Philip Alexander

The Van der Wheil was the pseudonym adopted by the man who replied to the Sports Forum column in an answer to a fellow correspondent's confusion over a trivial enough racing matter. The newspaper concerned was the UK Sporting Chronicle Handicap Book, forerunner of Raceform and later the Raceform Update. The date of the response was February 2, 1978.

This was an inauspicious enough date by anyone's reckoning, but it was one which marked the beginning of something quite special so far as several thousands of United Kingdom punters were concerned.

There are many weird and wonderful ways of pinpointing a horse that should be a candidate for the winner's enclosure, but the concise, yet easily understandable, manner of presentation which this Dutchman employed undoubtedly captured the imagination of succeeding generations of punters.

Evidence of this is the writing of countless booklets dealing with what was so succinctly expressed in the first place - The Golden Years Of Van Der Wheil, Racing In My System, Betting The VDW Way and The Ultimate Wheel Of Fortune, to name but four of the titles that have caused the name of Van der Wheil to live on long after the death of the man from Holland.

Even to this day his name or, in some racing circles, just his initials have become synonymous with the manner of form assessment known as the VDW Approach.

This is a method (as opposed to a rigid system) that produces a numerical evaluation of relevant factors, thus creating a picture from which it is possible to determine if there is a winner IN the race, rather than a winner OF the race itself. Let me attempt to be more specific over this rather complex matter.

Naturally, the vast majority of punters study an event for the express purpose of finding the winner. Even if this proves to be the most difficult of tasks, they will eventually convince themselves that they have unearthed the one animal that will fill the bill.

Instead of following this plan of action, the alternative suggestion put forward by VDW was to determine whether or not there was a horse in the field that possessed all the attributes of a future winner.

There is a subtle difference between the two processes. Indeed, it may take a little while for the true implications of the alternative approach to winner-finding to be grasped.

Once it has become established in your mind, though, you will be able to proceed with an evaluation of all the capabilities in the light of what has emerged. If there is no apparent winner IN the race, then you will have to look elsewhere for your bet.

Controversial though the subject of form may be, and it is doubtful whether any two experts (self-styled or otherwise) will always be in complete agreement over every single issue that can be put forward in favour of, or against, this major consideration in the selection process, it remains the indisputable record of performance.

As such, it constitutes the only means of reliable assessment of the individual animal, and the resultant comparison of the inherent ability of any one group of horses from the particular event under review.

Much has been written in the past regarding this opinion, and much more still awaits readers in the future. Little doubt exists in my own mind as to the veracity of this statement.

However, it remains true to say that form of the very highest order has no equal, and woe betide the punter who denies, or underestimates, this truism.

For it is an inescapable fact that a significantly high percentage of races are won by the form horses, and this is a proportion that can be greatly increased by judicious selectivity.

Horses that have achieved a relatively dependable level of performance appear in so many races, but this alone is not a sufficiently good enough recommendation to produce favourable results that will lead to sustainable and long-term profitability.

The suggestion made by Van der Wheil was to the effect that Consistent Form could be inaugurated by adding together the last three performance figures for each of the runners in the following manner.

For all horses the leading nine performance figures should be taken at face value. An example of this: a winner would be equal to 1 point, a horse finishing second 2 points, a third placing 3 points, and so on. This continues until you come across those animals that have finished in 10th position (or worse). Here the value of 10 points should be allotted to each of these finishers.

In the event of a horse having enjoyed only one or two outings, it should be assumed that it would have performed at the same standard as its last placing, e.g. form figures of only 12 would be awarded 1 + 2 + 2 = 5 points. This is done for all the runners; consequently it is the one with the lowest total that is deemed to be top rated.

Consideration Number Two is ability or the criterion that can only be judged by balancing various factors and evaluating the whole in a way that is strictly devoid of any sentiment.

A straightforward manner of assessing the field from an ability point of view would be to relate the prizemoney won to the number of races won.

Merely by viewing the prize- money in units of 100 and then dividing by the number of races won, this may be carried out in a most uncomplicated
fashion. Obviously, such an assessment is not foolproof, but at least it will enable a better overall judgement of comparative ability to be made. A typical example would be:

HORSE	PRIZEMONEY WON	DIVIDED BY 100	RACES WON	ABILITY RATING
A	$1907	19.07	2	9.53
B	$6110	61.10	5	12.22
C	$32,888	328.88	6	54.81
D	$5,693	56.93	8	07.11

 

Calculating according to these two proposals, the three most outstanding horses from the first five in the forecast betting for non-handicap races, or the first six if the race happens to be a handicap, will give a broad picture of what Van der Wheil was aiming at primarily.

Of course, there are minor additions, but these two factors form the basis of the approach to sorting out the wheat from the chaff.

Quality (and the application of logical simplification) as per the writings of the legendary John Mort Green (The Butterfly), is bound to enter the equation somewhere, and the recommendation in this respect is quite easily understood.

The most valuable race of the day is the obvious target for it has been proved time and time again that the more prestigious the event, the more reliable are the performances of the consistent runners, and that is the crux of the whole matter.

Many interpretations of the basic rules have been made since the first publication of the idea took place. Much conjecture has been manufactured as to what should be read "between the lines". A book could be written about this last mentioned element on its own - but that is not the point being discussed right now.

It would be completely unfair if I led the reader to believe that I agreed, without question, to every single point that was so eloquently expressed by the dutchman.

When he started writing about betting in general, his simple mathematics left a good deal to be desired. Also, several of the statements he made regarding what form figures could be relied upon to produce certain percentages of the total number of winners were way out, as any self-respecting statistician would tell you.

Furthermore, amongst the pieces of information that I like to see built in to any analysis, is the time-lapse factor. Expressed another way, the number of days that have elapsed since the horse's last racecourse appearance.

This was entirely missing from the VDW approach, and I would have felt more confident had it been accommodated in some form.

At times it must be acknowledged that Van der Wheil wrote like the very old, probably tired and undoubtedly sick man that he had become. However, we must be charitable and forgive any minor lapses that may have led to our confusion.

The past is bound to catch up, later if not sooner, on anyone who had been transported to a German concentration camp (believed to have been the notorious Auschwitz).

Testament to his correctness in the evaluation of certain aspects of betting all those years ago is that offshoots of his theories still keep appearing in the most erudite of publications, and wherever organised racing is being staged, the same group of statistics are forever providing winners -just like he said. It doesn't really matter, though, who was the first to expound this or that hypothesis, one thing remains certain.

Conceitedly, long after I have passed from this mortal coil and am enjoying the odd frolic in some Elysian Field, my hope is that someone somewhere may remember me for my insignificant contribution to racing. Realistically, I doubt whether there will be anyone who will greet the mention of my name with other than a quizzical look, or a furrowed brow.

Nevertheless, I have no doubt that the name Van der Wheil will continue to live on, to be argued about and to be discussed wherever the sport is taking place.

It must be so, for when all is said and done, there are only so many ways in which racing can be made to pay - and he demonstrated one of them so well.

- Philip Alexander, one-time handicapper of 2yo's for The Sporting Life in Britain, has written extensively on many aspects of the racing game. He is best known for his analytical and systems-orientated features as "Methodmaker" in the UK's leading racing newspaper, Raceform update. These have appeared weekly since 1989.

By Philip Alexander

PRACTICAL PUNTING - JANUARY 2003

Free Gifts – Sign Up

Welcome to Practical Punting. Everything you're looking for to become a great punter and increase your profits is right here.

Get FREE, INSTANT ACCESS to our:

• FREE Picking Midweek Winners:
  The essentials of midweek analysis and how to land those midweek winners and increase your profits.
• FREE Punting Calculator:
  A brilliant tool that enables you to bet on multiple selections so that whichever one wins, you win, too.
• FREE Staking e-Book:
  Staking - the crucial element to punting success. Great strategies to profitable betting.
• FREE Subscription to our "Enjoy Winning" newsletter:
  Packed with all the information you'll need to win.
• FREE Special Report:
  "50 Ways to Hit Top Gear." Winning ideas and profit making secrets.
  Just enter your information in the boxes below and you'll receive all the details instantly.

Sign up for your FREE GIFTS NOW!

• YES, please give me access to your FREE Punting Calculator, FREE Staking e-Book, FREE Special Report and email me your FREE "Enjoy Winning" Newsletter packed with useful punting tips and secrets.

Name :

E-Mail :

  

Please provide a valid e-mail address.

This feature requires registration with Practical Punting. Simply type in your email address and name and you can download your free gifts immediately. You'll also receive periodic special offers from us that we think may interest you and help you win.

Privacy Information

We will use your email address only to keep you informed about updates to our monthly magazine, websites and about other products and services that we think might interest you. We respect your privacy and your details will not be supplied to any other party.

If at any time you want to stop receiving them, you can easily unsubscribe. Every email we send provides an address that you can contact to withdraw your consent (unsubscribe).