Welcome to "On the Punt" with the Optimist

A SMALL THING BUT THEN AGAIN...

It was THAT track.

It just wasn't THAT distance.

And yet it was for others...

The track was FLEMINGTON.

Two significant runners were two immigrants from a powerful Cups Factory.

They ran in a 1200 metres mad scramble down the straight.

And at last report they had been sighted around the two furlong mark.

ALANDI last ran over 4000 metres in France in October. Irish horse.

MOURAYAN, another Paddy, last ran at Doncaster (no, the UK one) in September. Another stayer.

In both cases, the Makybe Diva preparation. Have a run or two then back to the paddock.

Then in the next race, the surprising second coming of Persian Star continued. She established herself as the only serious Cups threat emerging from the Ramsden.

Three stayers to note in that black book of ours. Being deadly serious, those two imports ran last and second last but they have finished and they have gone home to rest after their shocks.

They've seen the track, they've felt it underfoot, and they are sound.

That was all the owner wanted.

PEOPLE AND THEIR WAYS

I'm making this a regular series, so here's the first. Every so often we'll drop one into our meetings.

This one concerns a fellow I shared a bus ride with. I usually leave my car away from the city when I'm heading for Randwick, and train it into the city, then catch the quick and direct bus. Easier on the nerves!

This man, maybe in his fifties, knew me from casual nods at the track. He asked me the usual punters' openers: what I liked, what I thought of whatever was the latest racing scandal, etc etc. Then he got serious.

All his bets were on, he said. A basic bank with the TAB of $1500 covered him for eight total wipeouts including two possible nine-race cards. In fact he'd have around $50 spare for his pies.

Did I mention wipeouts? He'd had them. Who hasn't? But he was way in front, he assured me.

He has a very nice pair of Zeiss 10/40 roof prism binoculars. Two grand's worth, bought out of profits.

The secret, if it was a secret, was running doubles.

He takes running doubles between ALL races.

He only bets "live" so he can watch the racing with his pie, coke and all the Saturday newspapers, from the top of the public stand.

That's usually seven lots in an afternoon, and then toss in the daily double and the quaddie for good measure.

His bet level is standard and it never deviates.

$5 RUNNING DOUBLES at 2 selections per leg: 4 doubles, $20.

Seven lots per meeting (occasionaly eight): 7 lots of $20.

Total cost: $140.

Add the daily double: $20 (four lots of $5):

Total Cost now $160

And then a Quaddie at $1:

2 x 2 x 2 x 2 = $16.

Total Cost now $176.

This may seem a bit uneven, but he points out that the $24 available to make an even $200 means another weekend's full activities.

$176 x 8 = $1408, + 40 for the two longer programs = $1448.

No nine-race cards means he can squeeze his quaddie and daily double out of the following week's remainder.

How's he pick 'em? He doesn't say, except that he has his little quirks. Hates wide barriers (hear hear!) and doesn't back visitors.

Well, it's his way, and it's better than many I've seen. Of course you can make the units $1 instead of $5, and thus outlay about $48 for a day's interesting try-out. Or $24 for half units.

For a day at the races it's got a bit going for it.

HOME TRUTHS.

As I told you I sought out and had a great chat with one of my closest friends at Rosehill. This was in response to his email to me, in which he maintained that Place betting is simply not on for the average punter, be it single or multiple.

He started with THREE rules.

Without these, he stressed, you can forget any profits, regardless of how you juggle the books.

1. The qualifiers must return a long term profit on single bets made to win.

2. Your bank must be at least 100 times the size of any bet. This is regardless of the kind of bet and how many legs there are to it.

3. You must never bet more than 1 unit on any one horse or combination.

Simple? Well, yes, and not new.

But he maintained I was off beam, as he put it, "trying to turn a sow's ear into a silk purse".

He's tried for thirty years, on paper, to devise Place multiples, and he has never succeeded in achieving anything approaching a return that repays the effort and stress involved.

However, he asked me what I thought was the best bet all day. I answered Graceful Anna. He asked why she was omitted from my final three.

I explained that I believed her Place dividend would be appalling.

He just looked at me for a while, then said, quietly:

"EXACTLY!"

His point? That the only dead-set cert for a place all day was going to be bet off the map.

"You need 90% of them to get up for you to have any confidence", he offered.

"That just isn't on, unless you seek out the near-certs. And THAT means lousy, unfair dividends!"

Let's allow this to sink in and we'll come back to it in a day or so, when we've had the time to realise what he's insisting on.

It's not looking good for the Place Multi. though, if he's right!

ADVICE FROM AN EXPERT

A person whose views I admire immensely (and who has been highly successful in racing investment) offered me a host of information this afternoon at the races, and I couldn't wait to tell you that his suggestions are on the way.

He tried for years to crack place multiples before tossing them in. His reasons for that alone are worth a great deal to us. I'll get his views sorted in the next day or so and report back. Rest assured, he's given us all much food for thought!

KEEPING THE FAITH

As promised, just a note here; and we can compare our thinking after the races are run.

I've restricted myself to three. One's at Flemington and two are on the Gold Coast. As mentioned, they're not tips, but just to keep it all above board, I'm interested in watching Hawks Bay, Road to Rock and Cornwall Park with a view to furthering this Place idea.

CD's ARE NOT JUST FOR LISTENING TO.

CD. Compact Disc? Yes, but the punter immediately should think "Course and Distance".

It was brought home to me on Thursday as I tinkered further with our Place concept.

At Wagga, Happy Finish was a huge "neon light flashing" CD runner. He ran second and paid significantly better than even money.

And in the Cup at Warrnambool, the winner (by a huge margin) Hissing Sid was a multiple winner, including of last year's identical event.

In the big jumps race the winner Al Garhood had run a close second in the 2009 race. We don't have anything else over 5500 metres, so that was as near a CD as you're likely to get.

This weekend there are two "usual" tracks in the east, they being Flemington and Rosehill. However the Gold Coast also runs a big program. A quick count tells me that there's one CD in the first race, no less than six in the second, none in the third or the fourth, one in the fifth, seven in the sixth (three are reserves), three in the seventh and three in the final race.

There is also a pile of TD's, the next best thing in that department.

Anyway, all I'm saying at this stage is let's watch what happens with all these "qualifiers". Maybe nothing will, but then maybe we'll spot something that is worth taking a closer look at.

Meanwhile I'm trying to fine down those place possibilities as promised, and looking for an angle that will establish a basic criterion. Remember, it may not happen. That's always the challenge of our game!

CAUTION IS MY MIDDLE NAME

The only game in town. Indeed long term is just that.

On Saturday last, I managed to find three placings from four tries, and if I'd "yankeed" them I'd have come within three cents of even.

Not exactly a king's ransom? No, but near enough to keep my hook baited.

One thing that came to light (something I should have foreseen, as I've been spelling it out for years) was the impact that the fourth selection has on multiples.

A three-horse multiple (three doubles and a treble) costs four units.

A four horse multiple costs ELEVEN units!

So... one miss and you've lost seven of your eleven bets.

Hard, eh? Yes. it makes that fourth selection something to take VERY seriously.

In fact, I'm going back to three picks for our place experiment, as that fourth one, with its 64% impact, is too powerful. I'll grade them in order of preference and limit my place selections to three.

You might care to try too, on paper, as I will.

Additionally, I'm going to allocate three points each to the doubles and one to the treble. On the day the treble comes in (and I hope there are plenty of them, being place bets), I may be sorry I staggered the bet.

However, if only TWO make it into a place and pay $1.60 each, I'm in front. At this early stage of our experiment that's all I'm trying to do.

Stick around and see how we go. On Friday I'll pop in an update on the possibilities as I see them.

IT AIN'T ALL THAT EASY, BROTHER!

I spent several hours on the form analysing that one factor we spoke about late last week. How long do you spend altogether?

Anyway, I finally eliminated Eagle Farm completely, because I was unsure of the track surface, and the horses I was interested in were threatened by three or four others, meaning that even a place was problematical.

So, I opted for Hawkesbury and Caulfield.

Neeson looked the best all day and surely only the toppie could roll him. The toppie came out on the friday, and then I feared for the place price, especially TAB. And of course one more scratching and there'd be only two dividends. He still looked a near-certainty to win.

Pinwheel was the other near-cert, but he too would pay a pittance for the place.

On revealed recent and comparative form, I gave a huge chance to Snow Alert. There were two other big chances in the race but I finally decided that Snow Alert was pretty watertight for the place: excellent form, great barrier, won at the distance, the trainer of the moment... yes, he'd do nicely.

In my view, Caulfield had but two chances all day: Bird of Fire, well drawn in the final race with a string of placings and lots of revealed form (including a protest that went against him; but he had a relatively inexperienced rider) and Nine Tales, which was a certainty from a decent draw... which he didn't have!

I allowed Nine Tales. I thought he was the likely winner, but from the outside barrier there were "if's". As it was, he came from last and won easily. It happens. He was either going to do that or be chopped out.

My final decision was to go with Neeson and Snow Alert at Hawkesbury, and Bird of Fire down south along with Nine Tales. Using just one TAB so that everyone can see the bottom line, Neeson paid a remarkable $1,30 on the TAB. Before you scoff, that's 30% on the closest thing to a racecourse certainty you're going to see this year! Snow Alert paid $1.90, Nine Tales paid a weak $1.50, and Bird of Fire ran unplaced.

Pinwheel won. That happens too. But we're examining long term safety measures and there'll be the good and the bad in the Department of Deletions.

With three doubles and one treble, we returned $10.97 of the $11 outlaid. Four bets "won" and seven lost in the combination multiple.

Interestingly, the three shorties that "won" all DID win. Makes you think further?

Have a think about this and I'll get back with you in 48 hours.

"PLACING" A BET.

This is just a preamble really. If you read my previous blog, then you know what it's about (if not... well, slip back and have a peek).

I'm going to see if I can nail three or four (NO MORE) place bets that will pay maybe $1.50 or better, best TAB.

No money, just an experiment.

If I can find three such qualifiers, I'm going to theorise taking three doubles and a treble with a corporate that will give me best TAB place, or something that closely equates with it.

If four final qualifiers, there'll be four trebles and a fourtella/quaddie.

No singles, as they're not going to be worth the risk at their price.

I would suggest that you stay with the best chances. But do remember we don't tip here. So you might like to nominate the three, or four, you'd take and keep them separate (and marked down, so no fiddles... yeah, I will too, l promise... have to keep it all up front).

I'll seek out races where I believe the chances come down to three, or better still, two or even one.

That's going to take more than a bit of patience and control. But it's always part of the deal.

I'm seeing a place multiple as an interesting and potentially strong insurance backup for the serious punter. I think we can do it. I think you can do it, if we both remain true to what it's all about.

Let's go with the idea, and we'll see what happens.

(hoofnote: All corporates and TABs have different rules; it's really, financially, worth reading them.)

THINKING SIDEWAYS

Well, the weekend brought no real joy for me, but I feel satisfied that the two horses I came down to made a profit if backed each way, as I indicated I'd do.

I managed that $3.75 on Harris Tweed. He was never going to win, so suddenly I was rooting for him to hang on! We're strange beasts, us punters.

Monaco Consul was ridden a very odd race. I'm still puzzled, as it was out of line with everything I know about the horse. He too ran a place and in an eight-horse field, the each way bet was what I'd hoped:a bet to nothing. In fact he too produced a profit.

So, what about the argument that each way is for mugs?

And worse still,if you bet for the place, you're certifiable.

If you're a reader of PPM, you'd know that this has been going on for the life of the magazine. We have the devotees and the fanatically opposed.

Then there's me, somewhere in the middle. But you know what?

I'm starting to wonder big time if PLACE is the way to go.

We get best of the TAB divvies now, at several online centres. That can prove very, very significant. Ten or twenty cents added to your dividend can mean, effectively, around an extra dollar on every five returns. If you bet in, say, twenties, or fifties, it can mean a heck of a lot to you, long term.

And you know how I feel about long term.

SO...

What say we examine the races for a few weeks AFTER they've been decided, and see how the "place only" idea might be applied?

I'm game if you are!