3/1 for a race at the Weekend, yet Mark Winstanley was imploring his readers under the headline "Snap up the 4/1 about Sublimity for the Champion" this week. I seem to have scribbled underneath it 'only if you don't know how to bet, or don't mind losing money'. I do wonder if some of these journo's are in league with bookies sometimes. Like most fragile racehorses (he's more fragile than most too) you need to take 25% off his ante post price this far out. Why would anyone want to take 3/1 about what should be a more competitive race 3 months away, when they can have the same price in 48 hours? I've criticised Winstanley a few times as I genuinely think he's very, very poor. One of my biggest gripes with him, is that he tries to harvest extremely short priced selections which is imo, punting suicide. His own advert brags of having winners "up to 8/1" woh!!!! Advocating 4/1 ante post is plain stupid, even if I can follow his demented logic. Mind you, he does admit to having conceived of the idea whilst supping a few pints
It doth cloud ones judgement, and losen one's pockets Mark!!!
For my part, I'm still to be convinced that the horse is the real deal and not a very lucky inheritor of the mantle. Did he win it? Or did Brave Inca, Hardy Eustace, Detroit City, Straw Bear and Ikitiaf all conspire to lose it for different reasons?
So far this season we've seen a few of the grade 1 winners from Cheltenham turned over first time up.
Voy Por Ustedes - second
Katchit - third
Kauto Star - second
Ebaziyan - enough said!!!
My Way De Solzen - fifth
Denman and Inglis Drever are the only two to have obliged I think. I think the percentage call is to go the other way. Far from Sublimity winning well and his price collapsing to the 2/1 Winstanley hypothesises (he think's he's "burgled" the 4 with Corals) And not that I think his hypothesis necessarily justifies the bet anyway, but I think there's a better chance it'll remain unchanged, or go the other way a bit.