Tony Peach

[wee les]

after 5 Ascot 2nds im a bit punch drunk taking a break just now but it may call me back see what glorious goodwood brings

 

[BC]

I had a telephone conversation with Tony some years ago - don't ask me how - I can't remember how it came about. But he told me that he believed that everything we needed to know was in the books and that there was no need to study the examples. I know that many people will disagree with that. I don't know, but I thought I'd mention it.

So maybe you might want to ask him that yourself - i.e. would he advocate studying the examples using the old form books and/or old newspapers?

BC,

You are completely correct and he still reiterates it now, but he bases that assumption on the conversation he had on the telephone with VDW, when ever Tony would ask about this or that, VDW would close him down with " everything is there in the books" the same phrase.
Tony as previously explained was not a form expert and only through many conversations you will begin to realise that he is not,he is an incredibly nice chap all the same.

VDW gave the examples to check against the information he is telling us,he even goes on to tell us about Rope Ladder from 1967, he mentions the horses behind Sunset Christo and even information from the 3 lto races of horses, he tells K Spiers this was the last horse you should of been on,all relative to the form of horses
You may say you get the information for the 3lto races in the newspaper, I will say, but not of all the horses who competed in the race and what they did LTO, but I am not on a change your mind mission, just stating facts.

Thanks Bob. I thought that would be the case.

 

[goodlife]

A very interesting thread and - Bobajobber - I am glad to know that you enjoyed you visit to see TP. I wrote to him myself, almost five years ago and he invited me to see him at his bungalow in Worsley. My chief reason for going was to thank him for his efforts in publishing the articles and booklets. I also found him to be an extremely pleasant man and absolutely honest and straightforward. Pat Power had recently passed away and Tony informed me that Pat was the one - to his knowledge - who had made the most money from VDW, having won over a hundred thousand pounds.
On the question of VDW's true identity you probably know more than I, But Tony did show me the original correspondence along with a postcard from VDW which showed the Dutch War Memorial in, I think, Amsterdam. I was sorry to hear that his wife has dementia. He nursed his first wife until she passed away. As you say, a thoroughly nice man.

 

[Bobajobber]

Tony did show me the original correspondence along with a postcard from VDW which showed the Dutch War Memorial in, I think, Amsterdam.

Hello Goodlife,

Can you be a little more specific about the original correspondence that you had seen please and thanks.

 

[mtoto]

Bobba,

Thank you for at least trying to get a few answers to my questions. The answers were much as I expected but at least my thoughts have been confirmed.

I don’t doubt for one moment Mr Peach is a pleasant/ helpful chap when meet face to face, I have never doubted that. However that doesn’t change my mind he is a hard headed business man who achieved his goal, to make as much money as he could out of VDW.

The only thing in your rely to me that did surprise me was Mr Peach saying VDW wasn’t paid by the SCHB. I am 100% sure Mr Peach himself said he was on the forum that Mr Peach was part of. As I wouldn’t subscribe to that forum because of the involvement of Mr Peach I don’t have a copy of said posting but I have heard it confirmed elsewhere as well.

So in short Mr Peach made a small fortune of the back of someone else’s hard word without even taking the trouble/time to do some simple leg work. He then sold this work to the general public without even explaining he hadn’t bothered to check what he was selling worked!!

I’m at a loss to understand why you can’t see the anomalies but that is a different story. At least we both seem happy to defend VDW and claim his ideas work. I’m enclosing an e-mail sent to Mr Wheldon in Oct 08, asking why he was so adamant VDW’s ideas didn’t work as it was printed in the Raceform Update I’m reasonably Mr Peach would have seen it so he had plenty of time to look at the literature if he had any interest in proofing any of the ideas or answering any of the questions. I did also send him a much “softer” e-mail direct, I didn’t receive any answer.

Be Lucky


Copy of e-mail sent to the RFU.
Mr Wheldon,
I don't know if you remember me, but last year I did contact you a couple of times re VDW. This was because you are/were very disparaging about the worth of VDW, and I wanted to know how much you knew about the subject. As there was no real reply I started a thread on TRF as I had heard you looked in sometimes, and I wanted to know what your views were based on. This thread has grown and at the present time is one of the biggest on said forum.
The reason I am writing this today is to ask WHY Mr Peach is being given yet another chance to repeat all his old literature. The only reason I can see is so he can sell even more books on the subject as he isn't adding anything new to the puzzle. Hasn't he made enough out of being in the right place at the right time?
If he was going to try to explain a few of the apparent anomalies in the literature, and explain a few of the questions that really need answering if would be a very different matter. In this first article all we have is him agreeing with J Bingham about something that just doesn't add up.
He agrees or appears to be agreeing that the horses suggested by the other contributor D.M.B Stoke-on - Trent fail BECAUSE they hadn't won a race of any significance. If Mr Peach and for that matter Mr Bingham looked at the Cambridgeshire won by Baronet (an example sent in by a Mr Hall, and agreed by VDW as being a "good thing") they would see at 7 years of age the biggest race Baronet had won was only worth £3.850. So not winning a valuable race before hand doesn't stop a horse being the selection. I have no problem with En Attendant being the selection, but the reasons stated for eliminating the others just doesn't hold water.
If Mr Peach feels the need to re visit VDW I think he would be better advised to try to clear up the apparent anomalies, like. What are the numbers shown beside the horse in the Erin example, they aren't the consistency ratings, why if Spells It All Out does just that why does it eliminate 30% of the examples given before it was printed? Why did Mr Peach suggest/hint VDW only mentioned speed figures at his behest, when VDW says he had been using them since 1968? Why did VDW say Prominent King DIDN'T have a winning class rating when he had won two races before the Erin? To be honest I'm not even sure Mr Peach even knows these anomalies exist.
What Mr Peach does know is there is strong evidence VDW is still alive, and there are some very pertinent questions about his true persona. When phone conversations took place wasn't he surprised at the lack of an accent? How, and when did VDW receive payment for the articles, who paid them etc? Which articles are pure VDW, and how much if any editing took place in the other articles?
There is no way I'm a journalist, racing or otherwise, but if someone said to me they had, and could maintain an 80% strike rate I would certainly have made a serious effort to find out how/if it really was possible before I involved the general public. While I still have to be convinced about the strike rate I'm more than happy VDW was light years ahead of the game with his thinking, and it is still working to this day.
Rant over
Be Lucky
Mtoto

 

[goodlife]

Hello Goodlife,

Can you be a little more specific about the original correspondence that you had seen please and thanks.

As I recall Tony had a cardboard box - I think it was a large shoe box - which was about three-quarters full. There were about half a dozen hand-written letters and also a bundle of postcards.I did not examine all of the letters closely but the one I do remember was the one which is featured in "Systems In My Racing" beginning "When I began to write for Sports Forum . . ." I could not give close attention to them all as I was in conversation with both Tony and his wife. I remember thinking about his alleged wartime service when I saw the postcard featuring the War Memorial. At that point I don't think that his being Dutch had been questioned on the internet although I may be wrong. Tony gave me a postcard which I still have from Gibralter,dated 1995 and promising Tony Peach some stamps for his collection as a gift. What mystified me although I did not ask too many questions was how they could have fallen out so badly afterwards.

 

[Bobajobber]

Hello Goodlife,

Can you be a little more specific about the original correspondence that you had seen please and thanks.

As I recall Tony had a cardboard box - I think it was a large shoe box - which was about three-quarters full. There were about half a dozen hand-written letters and also a bundle of postcards.I did not examine all of the letters closely but the one I do remember was the one which is featured in "Systems In My Racing" beginning "When I began to write for Sports Forum . . ." I could not give close attention to them all as I was in conversation with both Tony and his wife. I remember thinking about his alleged wartime service when I saw the postcard featuring the War Memorial. At that point I don't think that his being Dutch had been questioned on the internet although I may be wrong. Tony gave me a postcard which I still have from Gibralter,dated 1995 and promising Tony Peach some stamps for his collection as a gift. What mystified me although I did not ask too many questions was how they could have fallen out so badly afterwards.

Thanks for that Goodlife,

I in fact own them very letters one is two pages long and the other is 4 pages long and I just so happen to have a postcard from Madeira,mentioning stamps and that he was happy his book sold out. I had a feeling you were going to mention more.

 

[Bobajobber]

Copy of e-mail sent to the RFU.
Mr Wheldon,
I don't know if you remember me, but last year I did contact you a couple of times re VDW. This was because you are/were very disparaging about the worth of VDW, and I wanted to know how much you knew about the subject. As there was no real reply I started a thread on TRF as I had heard you looked in sometimes, and I wanted to know what your views were based on. This thread has grown and at the present time is one of the biggest on said forum.
The reason I am writing this today is to ask WHY Mr Peach is being given yet another chance to repeat all his old literature. The only reason I can see is so he can sell even more books on the subject as he isn't adding anything new to the puzzle. Hasn't he made enough out of being in the right place at the right time?
If he was going to try to explain a few of the apparent anomalies in the literature, and explain a few of the questions that really need answering if would be a very different matter. In this first article all we have is him agreeing with J Bingham about something that just doesn't add up.
He agrees or appears to be agreeing that the horses suggested by the other contributor D.M.B Stoke-on - Trent fail BECAUSE they hadn't won a race of any significance. If Mr Peach and for that matter Mr Bingham looked at the Cambridgeshire won by Baronet (an example sent in by a Mr Hall, and agreed by VDW as being a "good thing") they would see at 7 years of age the biggest race Baronet had won was only worth £3.850. So not winning a valuable race before hand doesn't stop a horse being the selection. I have no problem with En Attendant being the selection, but the reasons stated for eliminating the others just doesn't hold water.
If Mr Peach feels the need to re visit VDW I think he would be better advised to try to clear up the apparent anomalies, like. What are the numbers shown beside the horse in the Erin example, they aren't the consistency ratings, why if Spells It All Out does just that why does it eliminate 30% of the examples given before it was printed? Why did Mr Peach suggest/hint VDW only mentioned speed figures at his behest, when VDW says he had been using them since 1968? Why did VDW say Prominent King DIDN'T have a winning class rating when he had won two races before the Erin? To be honest I'm not even sure Mr Peach even knows these anomalies exist.
What Mr Peach does know is there is strong evidence VDW is still alive, and there are some very pertinent questions about his true persona. When phone conversations took place wasn't he surprised at the lack of an accent? How, and when did VDW receive payment for the articles, who paid them etc? Which articles are pure VDW, and how much if any editing took place in the other articles?
There is no way I'm a journalist, racing or otherwise, but if someone said to me they had, and could maintain an 80% strike rate I would certainly have made a serious effort to find out how/if it really was possible before I involved the general public. While I still have to be convinced about the strike rate I'm more than happy VDW was light years ahead of the game with his thinking, and it is still working to this day.
Rant over
Be Lucky
Mtoto

I find it funny that Mr Wheldon rambles about TP like he is the reason why he cannot find the answers to his frustrations,but then he is happy that VDW was miles ahead,...like his anomalies,it does not add up
I believe there is little reason to point the finger at TP for offering up the work of VDW, remember at the end of the day, you /we chose to buy the books, our arms were not bent back, there are many who offer up work without any proof of its worth, irrespective of the strike rate and it does not even scratch the surface of what VDW offered up.

The answers are there and like catching a trout by hand, they have to be tickled out, the problem is you may have to tickle for a longer than you are prepared to want to, through experience most have given up tickling to soon.

 

[mtoto]

I find it funny that Mr Wheldon rambles about TP like he is the reason why he cannot find the answers to his frustrations,but then he is happy that VDW was miles ahead,...like his anomalies,it does not add up.

Bobba,

Once again you have lost me. In the above have you mixed me up with Mr Wheldon? Mr Wheldon doesn't for one moment think VDW's ideas/methods are of any use at all in fact he was/is just taking the piss out of VDW and his ideas.

I believe there is little reason to point the finger at TP for offering up the work of VDW, remember at the end of the day, you /we chose to buy the books, our arms were not bent back, there are many who offer up work without any proof of its worth, irrespective of the strike rate and it does not even scratch the surface of what VDW offered up.

While I agree 100% with your thoughts on the worth of VDW's work, I can only see one reason for Mr Peach publishing so much literature about the methods and that is purely and simply to make money. I also agree many books are published about making money by backing horse, but have to say in the main they are the works of journalists and or punters. While I also agree at times there is often little or no actual proof the proof can be found by CHECKING the ideas and results. That is my only problem with the way Mr Peach went about making his money, he made no effort to confirm what he was selling worked. Whether or not it was intentional or not I have no idea but not only did he not check out ANY of the ideas in my mind he went out of his way to muddy the waters by printing other folks ideas of what VDW was trying to do/show. I'm also happy to say I haven't put a penny in Mr Peach's pocket as I have never paid for any of his publications.

The answers are there and like catching a trout by hand, they have to be tickled out, the problem is you may have to tickle for a longer than you are prepared to want to, through experience most have given up tickling to soon.

Again I have no problem with this last fact, but have to ask if you don't think the literature is full of anomalies why are there so many different ideas and solutions being used to solve the puzzle? Because I no longer bother to put up selections, and try to explain in plain English what I think, and why I think it doesn't mean I'm frustrated or giving up. In fact I'm more than happy with the way things are going.

Be Lucky

 

[Bobajobber]

Bobba,

Once again you have lost me. In the above have you mixed me up with Mr Wheldon? Mr Wheldon doesn't for one moment think VDW's ideas/methods are of any use at all in fact he was/is just taking the piss out of VDW and his ideas.

Mtoto,

" While I still have to be convinced about the strike rate I'm more than happy VDW was light years ahead of the game with his thinking, and it is still working to this day."

I honestly believe we read things in a totally different context,this line above is far from somebody taking the piss out of VDW, in fact the letter is a personal jab at TP, yes he uses VDW supposed anomalies as a point pushing exercise, but all frustration is planted on TP's doorstep.

While I agree 100% with your thoughts on the worth of VDW's work, I can only see one reason for Mr Peach publishing so much literature about the methods and that is purely and simply to make money. I also agree many books are published about making money by backing horse, but have to say in the main they are the works of journalists and or punters. While I also agree at times there is often little or no actual proof the proof can be found by CHECKING the ideas and results. That is my only problem with the way Mr Peach went about making his money, he made no effort to confirm what he was selling worked. Whether or not it was intentional or not I have no idea but not only did he not check out ANY of the ideas in my mind he went out of his way to muddy the waters by printing other folks ideas of what VDW was trying to do/show. I'm also happy to say I haven't put a penny in Mr Peach's pocket as I have never paid for any of his publications.

I have already expressed that TP was just doing what he normally does, I agree with yours and Mr Wheldon's sentiment that TP was riding the gravy train, but excuse me for saying this, "Who wouldn't?? "
TP was clever enough to separate VDW away from the buzzards and in a real business sense controlled it, although he had no real control of the actual work that was on offer, he knew full well that VDW had a good following, so knew there was money to be made, if it was anybody else, they would of done exactly the same.

Again I have no problem with this last fact, but have to ask if you don't think the literature is full of anomalies why are there so many different ideas and solutions being used to solve the puzzle? Because I no longer bother to put up selections, and try to explain in plain English what I think, and why I think it doesn't mean I'm frustrated or giving up. In fact I'm more than happy with the way things are going.

When I read your quote, it is easily clear that they are not anomalies, they are opinions/interpretations, especially if there are many of them.
Nothing wrong with being happy how things are going?, although I have myself focussed on many things at present, which I will only be happy to bring forward to others later, but there is a lot going on.
Note
VDW was very much attracted to the older lady and was married twice to woman that were a decade or nearly a decade older than him.

 

[mtoto]

" While I still have to be convinced about the strike rate I'm more than happy VDW was light years ahead of the game with his thinking, and it is still working to this day."

I honestly believe we read things in a totally different context,this line above is far from somebody taking the piss out of VDW, in fact the letter is a personal jab at TP, yes he uses VDW supposed anomalies as a point pushing exercise, but all frustration is planted on TP's doorstep.

Bobba,

As you say the quote above ISN'T from someone taking the piss about VDW it is part of the e-mail I sent to Mr Wheldon!!!! As far as I can make out Wheldon has NEVER tried to understand any of the VDW methods or even read them in any detail, so HE wouldn't even know if there were any anomalies. Mr Wheldon was hinting and seemed to be agreeing with the very mistaken idea VDW was in fact Mr Peach.

I have already expressed that TP was just doing what he normally does, I agree with yours and Mr Wheldon's sentiment that TP was riding the gravy train, but excuse me for saying this, "Who wouldn't?? "
TP was clever enough to separate VDW away from the buzzards and in a real business sense controlled it, although he had no real control of the actual work that was on offer, he knew full well that VDW had a good following, so knew there was money to be made, if it was anybody else, they would of done exactly the same.

Two things here. First now I maybe old fashioned, but for me the first thing anyone should do before selling anything to the general public is check that is the genuine article and from Mr Peach's answers to some of your questions it is very obvious he made no effort to do that, So my answer to that first part of the question "Who wouldn't?? " has to be anyone with an ounce of integrity. The second part I have already said it is obvious Mr Peach was a good business man, but when you look at the situation HE was in the driving seat. He controlled the letters that were printed in the SCHB forum, so we had plenty letters praising the good bits and the dissenting letters kept to the few. The few that did get printed like many posts today were easily ridiculed because there were so many different interpretations so a quick you didn't / don't understand what is being said put pay to them. Thus building up the mystic around the methods, one had to be cleverer than the average punter to understand what was going on, Then add in the different ideas published by Mr Peach involving different people's ideas of how the methods worked. Mr Bingham, the jackform chap, Sad Ken, etc. and we have an even bigger puzzle to sort out.

When I read your quote, it is easily clear that they are not anomalies, they are opinions/interpretations, especially if there are many of them.

I suppose this is where we are different, to me they must be anomalies BECAUSE there are so many different opinions /interpretations, doesn't the fact there are so many make you wonder why? Is there nothing in the literature that make you ask can this be taken to mean something else, why did he do /say that?

VDW was very much attracted to the older lady and was married twice to woman that were a decade or nearly a decade older than him.

Fair play, nice work if you can get it Toy boy to two rich old ladies way to go.

Be Lucky

 

[DuckandDive]

I've followed various threads with interest including the ones "over the road".

One area I'd like to clarify is the high Strike Rate achieved.

Was it ever confirmed that is was achieved by single betting or dutch betting?

 

[hayzee]

You too can have a strike rate like his...
anyone can be a hero with the secret 'Aftertiming Method'...

 

[Bobajobber]

I've followed various threads with interest including the ones "over the road".

One area I'd like to clarify is the high Strike Rate achieved.

Was it ever confirmed that is was achieved by single betting or dutch betting?

In a thread that has been offered up kindly by BC , there is a mentioned either by Fulham or George Johns that Lee got the closest to being nearest the strikerate, the small issue is it was not bang on,. but in essence it was not a humungous amount of selections.

 

[Bobajobber]

I suppose this is where we are different, to me they must be anomalies BECAUSE there are so many different opinions /interpretations, doesn't the fact there are so many make you wonder why? Is there nothing in the literature that make you ask can this be taken to mean something else, why did he do /say that?

I have mentioned in previous posts that if you are lacking in using all of the elements offered up, you will misinterpret what was offered up, surely you can understand if you are missing a correct factor or two that it will not work as you may think it would, VDW said " How can a single cog work in isolation?"
I am not going to push the point as it will just end in tears as usual, I will say that I have no issues with the points that you make.

"VDW was very much attracted to the older lady and was married twice to woman that were a decade or nearly a decade older than him."

Fair play, nice work if you can get it Toy boy to two rich old ladies way to go.

VDW married his mothers carer.

 

[mick]

Very interesting to read this thread.My own thoughts on the whole VDW saga are that while the guys letters where the cause of much frustration even anger amounst some,he did in fact do punters a great service.Long hours spent form reading in an attempt to "see" a race in the same way as himself would have proved time well spent for many as even failing to crack his method i feel sure that the knowledge and experiance gained from trying would have been put to future good use by some.

I always felt that the last part of his five part formula was the least discussed but the most important.HARD WORK.

Many punters bet for fun,i have absolutely no problem with this,but if your intention is to make worthwhile long term gains then hard work is a necessity.If you intend to view your betting as an investment then why should this be otherwise.?

 

[hayzee]

as you say Mick,at the very least,the VDW method gave punters that were just throwing money away a fairly sound way to be in with a valid chance and looking at races in a more structured way means a lesson in discipline that is never wasted.
I regret that G.Hall felt the need for so much deceit,far beyond a simple nom de plume,and this spoils a 'good thing' for me,but for some the Holy Grail has been found,and he is the way,the truth,and the sporting life.

 

[mick]

Hi Haze i have not followed so am unaware of the deceit you mention.I recall the letters from G.Hall at the time claiming to have found the "missing link".Personally i never felt there was one other than that VDW supplied some good ingredients but left it to others to best learn how to cook the cake.

I recall several times VDW using the phrase "subject to other considerations" and this is where the hard work comes into play.

 

[downey]

Mick
I have read somewhere that G Hall was in fact VDW, he was trying to stimulate the debate on his methods because it went quiet for a while.
Downey

 

[mick]

Mick
I have read somewhere that G Hall was in fact VDW, he was trying to stimulate the debate on his methods because it went quiet for a while.
Downey

Cheers i was unaware of this.I was involved right from the start and speaking as someone who spent much time trying but still failed to successfully interpret the method i do believe that Mr VDW was completely genuine and did achieve the results he claimed.