VDWers all owe Tony Peach a debt of gratitude for publishing the various contributions VDW made to the Sporting Chronicle Handicap Book in booklet form, but some may not know that Tony also re-published three of four booklets written by another race analyst under the pseudonym "Marvex", which are also well worth a read.
In his "Judgement of Form" "Marvex" wrote:
"The form book is a record of the past and properly read is the guide to the future - very seldom does the result of a race so confound the form student that he tears his hair; he may be surprised by a result but he has only to get out his form books to find substantiation therein in 99 cases out of a 100."
The essential truth of that comment was once again demonstrated when this evening I reviewed the only race I analysed today, the 7.30 Southwell.
When I looked at the race this morning it turned out to be problematic, due in part to a questionmark in my mind about the identity of the class/form horse. In the end I opted for a place only bet, which I shared hours before the off with Oldtimer of the Kimmypops forum.
I was surprised by the winner, Luscivious, and the 16/1 SP (co-8th in the betting with only one horse at longer odds), suggests that I wasn't alone. But checking his career shows that we shouldn't have been all that surprised.
Prior to today, Luscivious had run in 12 handicaps at Southwell, nine over today's 5f. Taking those nine as particularly relevant to today's race, he had failed to make the frame in races of class 97 and 107, but had twice won at class 91, both times off a mark of 85, which provides something of a benchmark. In his five other runs at class 91 or lower, he had been placed three times (in classes 52, 78 and 87) and been down the field twice (in classes 78 and 91). In sum, here we had a 6yo with over 50 runs in total (so unlikely to surprise), proven to class 91, who had run seven times over the 5f at Southwell in handicaps of 91 or below, resulting in two wins, three places and two down the fields.
Today, therefore, Luscivious was running over his best trip on a course which he has shown he handles well, in a race of class 71, lower in class than six of his seven previous runs over course and distance. That he should be able to win the race off a mark only 1lb higher than that off which he had twice won class 91s shouldn't have been a surprise to any of us.
I am not suggesting one could reasonably have picked Luscivious out as the likely winner (nor was he my place bet): merely that if one had done what VDW indicated with regard to Roushayd and checked out his career, one could not reasonably have written him off as a no-hoper, especially bearing in mind that, from the perspective of VDW's measure of ability, he ranked 3rd best in the field.
