"I guess we just have to have to take these poor odds!"

Do we?

We suggest punters should be very careful when they hear ex-jockeys and other media promoted "experts" telling them how good a horse is and that they should back it at the odds available.

Some time ago we heard an ex jockey describing an odds on favourite along the following lines:

Look at him parading in the enclosure. He looks like he's really gone on. There's a lot expected of him. The only thing that might stand in his road here is of course we've got a soft track. It's his first go at it. But they've rolled the track. I still don't think they can beat him. His trainer has got a very big opinion of him... These odds of $1.60 are pretty short. Well, we'll just have to take that.

The ex jockey has correctly identified two problems with the bet:

1. It's the horse's first run on a rain affected track
2. The horse's odds were very short at $1.60.

The correct conclusion was to tell his audience not to back the horse. Unfortunately he did not say that. When you know a horse is poor odds why say "we'll just have to take that."

The huge advantages punters have over bookmakers are:

1. Deciding what races they want to bet in.
2. Deciding what odds to accept.

If you identify a horse as no value then you leave the horse alone and do not back it. It's as simple as that.

If most punters had an understanding of market percentages and were prepared to be more discriminating with their bets then bookmakers like those in Adelaide would not be able to offer so many markets at 130%+ and attract plenty of business.