One of the first rules for a handicap punter is unfortunately that old cliché about not looking beyond the next game - and indeed not looking at the next game until all the team details are in, last-minute injury news released, weather forecast checked etc. It's a plodding game of percentages. The Fijians of the betting world we are not.

But that shouldn't stop us occasionally getting ahead of ourselves, if only for a bit of fun.

So who's going to win this competition that is fiendishly difficult to call? One thing that strikes me is that no side has ever won it without a dominant personality at fly-half, and it also helps to have a charismatic captain, preferably a forward, if not a scrum-half. Looking at the four teams left by those criteria makes for an interesting study.

South Africa have a semi-charismatic leader in Jon Smit, but they cannot claim to have the kind of game-shaping fly-half previous winners have had. Butch James is a solid customer with the odd flash of class, but he doesn't really grab a game by the scruff of the neck. Mind you, in Fourie du Preez they have a scrum-half so intelligent and influential that they might credibly put him forward as the game-shaper. But the lack of an old-school playmaker at 10 is an interesting gap in their armoury.

The same is true of France. Fly-halfs have never seemed to feature high on their list of priorities - Didier Camberabero is about the only established out-and-out fly-half I can think of in the last 20 years, though Christophe Lamaison and Thierry Lacroix may disagree, even if they were often played at centre. Lionel Beauxis may yet establish himself, but he's so new to it all that this World Cup could be too soon.

Argentina and England, on the other hand, qualify on both the fly-half and captaincy fronts. Phil Vickery is an iconic bull-like figure and Jonny Wilkinson's charisma speaks for itself. And, for the Pumas, no captain in the forwards but possibly the most charismatic skipper of all in Agustin Pichot at scrum-half, and the best fly-half at present in Juan Martín Hernández.

Does this mean they will win the World Cup? I don't know. I never look beyond the next game! But as it happens I will be recommending handicap bets along those lines.

England +9 v France (Stan James)

I'm at a loss, really, to explain why England have so large a handicap, however bad their form earlier in the competition. Public opinion at large, which is usually mirrored roughly by the bookies, may have France as slight favourites but +9 is a big handicap for a momentous game like this. The handicap for England-Australia, supposedly a complete mismatch, was only around +13.

I have an edge for France in the three-quarters, but otherwise slight edges for England in the front row and at half-back, which are likely to be more crucial areas. Add in that factor of a youngster at 10 for France against a proven winner, and it would be irresponsible to recommend against England.

Argentina +10 v South Africa (Stan James)

Same sort of story here, really. Man for man there's not a lot in it, though both sides have slight advantages in different departments. Argentina's record so far surely demands more respect than it's given by the handicap. They may be tired, but only five of their side have started every game, and only two of them, Patricio Albacete and Juan Lobbe, have been forwards (the Contepomis and Ignacio Corleto are the backs).

One thing they always are is passionate and committed. Injury concerns were reported over Pichot, Hernandez, Felipe Contepomi and Corleto, but they could almost be hand-picked as among the Pumas' most influential players; so is this a case of mind games, especially now they have been named in the starting XV?

Expect kicks to rain down on the brilliant but temperamental JP Pietersen and Percy Montgomery. Expect Butch James and Francois Steyn to be harried to distraction. Again, it's difficult to see much other than an edgy, intense affair.