Welcome to "On the Punt" with the Optimist

GET WELL BART!

Bart is in hospital again, this time with a broken pelvis.

Let's just use this blog to wish The Master of the Australian Turf a speedy recovery.

Go Bart!

We have at least two new "champions". Or do we?

As we thought, after the weekend we have at least two new "champions".

They are, of course, Toorak Toff and So You Think.

Well, cautious old Optimist that I am, I say I can wait and watch.

Watchful waiting, the medicos call it.

Reverse the runs enjoyed by Shoot Out and So You Think on Saturday and I suspect you reverse the result.

Stop Mr Rawiller from ruining the Golden Rose and who can say? Chance Bye and Run for Levi are beautifully placed, then suddenly they are barrelled into the rails.Outside of that pair we have Gybe, a longshot, and Crystal Lily, winner of the Golden Slipper and strongly favoured here. She could end up sore.

All ruined. Stuffed, totally, by a cowboy ride. Nine racedays off, he got. I wonder where the stewards dug out that wristslap from their mysterious "rules book".

Meanwhile Ilovethiscity gets continuously smashed from pillar to post and still, somehow, runs a mighty third.

The jury's still out on both champions, and anyway the odds on the pair of "new champions" won't be what they ought to be. The bookies will take the cash without needing to be fair. Let's watch, but not join in the latest lemming stampede.

ALL WILL BE REVEALED... OR NOT.

Today, August 28, we will see some super racing in both Sydney and Melbourne.

In a nutshell, we may see the winners of the big spring races.

Or we may not.

Look, it's that difficult!

The writers will go overboard in tomorrow's papers and on the telly. New champions everywhere, or old ones re-established.

Just remember one thing:

Remember that it ain't necessarily so.

The shorteners after today's racing will be the ones that get on the hype bandwagon, and yes, they may be the up-and-coming champs of the new season.

Or, of course, they may not be...

WHAT DO YOU KNOW?

It's amazing how many unknowns carry public money.

Significant money.

Many thousands of dollars in fact.

Here's a little test for us all:

Go to an early website such as the RSB and look at the acceptances.

Print them, then tick the ones you know.

Go down the fields and run a decent texta highlighting pen through all the horses you don't immediately know.

That's all.

Except that, arguably, the ones you just texta'd are not backable, because you're depending on someone else to tell you what YOU should know.

I suggest you do this for a few weeks, file the decisions, and then look back and see what won what.

If unknowns won any of the races, ask how it came about that you didn't know them.

It might just sharpen your betting approach quite a lot.

EARLY TO BED...

"Early" can be clever. If YOU'RE smart!

For what it's worth, I always maintain a separate bank for the big prepost racing.

I don't, or I try not to, bet in the days coming up to a race, where the field has been declared. This is because a scratching can leave you sick in the stomach when your bet pays less by maybe 40 cents in the return dollar.

Shoot Out on Saturday paid $3 at starting price. He wasn't much more prepost before the equal favourite, So You Think, came out.

But had you backed him on the Friday night, you were in for a horrible surprise when you collected.

You didn't get 2/1!

However, I do try to get a couple of bets on the biggest races (for the example THE cup).

I grabbed some of SHOCKING $35 when the NSW TAB offered that price as a promotion. He's around $13 at present.

And I've risked a bet on SHOOT OUT at 20/1. He may not start, but if he does it will be after a terrific Cox Plate run which will see him favourite for the Tuesday race at perhaps 4/1 best. Or shorter!

A decent risk, I think.

I have a separate bank, and I bet 1% on any of these choices. I look to average 20/1 or better, meaning five of the hundred need to salute to cover my outlay and give me 5% on turnover.

My target is 8% success. Not high, agreed, but then this is a risky business that requires confidence and patience, along with the knowledge of what I am backing, why, and when.

That 8% will bring me, at a minimum of $21 (20/1), 60% profit on turnover.

And a lot of fun.

But it has to be separate, and it has to be long term and seriously evaluated. Every bet matters equally.

_______________________

Roman and I had a great day at Caulfield, and thank you to the Melbourne Racing Club for the passes. I'll be writing it all up in my Educating the Punter for the October issue of PPM but I should mention that Roman cracked a winner at $11. That was our best combined effort. He's a cagey and very knowledgeable investor, that man.

_______________________

TREAD WARILY!

Courtesy of the Melbourne Racing Club, I'll be at Caulfield this weekend, with my good pal Roman Koz (who's over there opposite me, on the front page).

I wish I could say that the weather's great down here, but at present it most definitely is NOT.

That being the case, the Liston, the Quezette and other races of significance take on new and higher dimensions of difficulty. There's a fine (more or less...) and cold (yes I can already vouch for that) weather forecast. We had all four seasons today and last night, so who's going to risk saying how the track will play on Saturday?

Brisbane had its wettest-ever August day on Wednesday, or was it Tuesday? Either way, there must have been a pretty interesting spectacle awaiting the staff early next morning.

And in Sydney on Tuesday locals could not recall a wetter day's racing since 1983!

So, tread warily as I say above. This doesn't HAVE to be the day you break the bank of Monte Carlo.

Just make sure it's not the day you break your own bank!

THE FIRST RULE

Did you happen to watch the big steeplechase at Morphettville?

Nuvolari, the oldest runner in the small field at eleven years of age (truly), and with NO wins either on the track or at the distance, picked up the leader in the shadows of the post.

The exhausted favourite fell at the second last jump.

Now here's my point:

The riders were senior, experienced jumps jockeys. This was no novice hurdlle, it was the Sportingbet Grand National, a $50K affair, not bad money for this type of event.

There were six runners and one was already retiring from the skirmish.

Four of them (I kid you not) attacked the living hell out of each other at the 1200 mark. For about 500 metres they slogged it out. It cost one of them his feet as they entered the straight. The favourite.

ONE horse sat back and started to come on as they swung.

He picked up the one that had been leading most of the way but had its metaphorical throat cut by the other three in that "cutthroat" stuff three quarters of a mile out.

Just ONE rider who displayed any semblance of reason at all.

Only one.

Makes you wonder about things, doesn't it?

TWO UP AND EXPECT MORE.

No names no pack drill. Maybe one of them will turn out to be a freak.

But get this: the figures are horribly against an AJC Derby winner taking out the big Cup. Horribly.

And as to the new three year olds, well, next Saturday will tell us a little, but not everything.

Whatever you do, don't bet prepost this early.

There are 92 days before the Melbourne Cup. We need 10/1 about any horse starting.

All the other factors are afterthoughts. Less than 10/1 with three months to go isn't even a proposition.

Not Ever.

And the new kids on the block? All the articles in the press are accompanied by trainers' patter, how they hope for this and think that.

Good luck to them, all of them.

But the hard facts are that some of the new three year olds will NOT make the grade.

No matter WHAT they did as two year olds.

No matter WHAT they won.

It's a new season, the biggest change of their entire racing careers.

And frankly, it's anybody's guess.

Sorry to be a nark, but call it years of experience, watching the money go early on so many cot cases.

It makes you a bit cynical about early season form.

And a lot cynical about emerging three year old early season form.

Maybe, just maybe, I've saved you a dollar or two.

SECOND STAR TO THE RIGHT AND STRAIGHT ON TILL MORNING.

Yes, however.

Again we are faced with comparing apples with oranges. Horses of a different period.

On one scale of argument, how could anyone argue that a mare that won the Cup three times in a row was anywhere but Number One? I'd find it difficult.

True it's a handicap. But three times???

On another scale, the handicapping one, well, none of us saw Carbine but his record speaks volumes. And I have only known three people who saw Phar Lap. Two of them I knew really well.

Reg Maloney was my close friend for many years. He knew and watched the great horse. He said Peter Pan was better.

Arn Rogers was a great racing man and known to many of my readers. He said that Peter Pan was the best in his time.

By a street.

And Phar Lap and Peter Pan were virtually contemporaneous and therefore to an extent comparable.

And the second star to the right? Many of you would recognise it. It's Peter's direction for Wendy, to get to the Never Land. Straight on till morning.

Opinion, of course.

I don't recall ever asking the third person the question. Sorry!

But let's be very, very rational here.

Galilee at 5 and Light Fingers at 22? She wins in '65, then runs him a decent race for second in '66 with the grandstand on board.

Doriemus at 23 and Might and Power at 11? Hang on there. Doriemus wins in '95, wins a Caulfield Cup and lips another, then lips the '97 Cup to Might and Power giving weight and nobody knows which horse has won. And Might and Power is 11, and Doriemus 23???

The Barb splits Saintly and Dalray. Well, Dalray's win was one of the all-time great big-finishing wins (rather in the Kiwi mould). Saintly's was a wonderful demolition job. The Barb? My goodness it was 1866! I don't know how you start to compare them.

Malua? Up there with the mighty Makybe, that's for sure. An all-distance champ, if my memory of the stats holds up. But frankly I'm not going to check it.

I know a great judge who maintains that Rising Fast, winner in 1954 and "shoulda" in 1955 when the rider and trainer failed to protest (it remains a major mystery of the turf as to why, since the horse, it is reported was a certainty to get the race in the stewards' room), was a champion, a GREAT horse. Look at his record some time and nod. Of his time he was the king.

The assessor never had a hope of being "right" and he did a grand job. But if one thing was established, it was that the task set was an impossible one. Handicap or not.

HERE THEY COME!

The "champions" will emerge after this weekend. One or two per week for the next five or six weeks.

Several will never amount to much.

Maybe, just maybe, one will actually be a champion.

Maybe.

But you shouldn't hold your breath.

The press needs stories and they can always find a trainer ready to tell them he/she "has a champion that is the best one they've ever trained etc etc..."

The price, the next time this one steps out, will be below what it ought to be.

That, in fact, is the one thing you can be sure of about the horse.