Racing is all about opinions, but there are four things we know for absolute certain!

The options to gamble have never been so vast and there are lots of ways of making a profit. Bookmakers are compelled to lay odds for each race every day and that is some undertaking, they are often wrong and this weakness can be exploited! So how can our bettors take advantage?

Our answer is always the same, align yourself with mathematics. Beware the hindrances, impediments and obstructions, beware hype, bias and pontification - in other words pundits! Of all the tipsters out there, only a handful can show a profit via a profit and loss account. 

For example, Paul Kealy of the Racing Post makes a very good living tipping, and personifies what the average punter is up against. He says:

"I don't like short prices. As a tipster charged with looking at all races, I think punters are entitled to expect me to come up with something other than the obvious."

He is WRONG! Punters who buy the Racing Post would expect someone like him to come up with a PROFIT, not something that is not obvious, but records a LOSS!

The sentence does not make sense on any level! What is it he does not like about short prices? What price ceases to be short? What prices does he like? We would much prefer a monthly profit backing those winning at shorter prices, than a loss from betting on something other than the obvious!

Further to the above, it is our belief most people within racing, fail to grasp the real concept of value in betting, Kealy is one of them. In a literal sense there is no such thing as pure value, the word value is subjective! Besides, each race priced up will include an overround of 10% to 20% confirming the price has already been taxed so in effect lessened, so not pure value.

So the word value should be replaced by the phrase perceived value, because not one individual on earth can determine what exact value is. Perceived value can be found in a 4/9 shot, a 5/4, a 7/2, 10/1 or 33/1. The tipperati will tell you value comes from horses at bigger prices - this is simply not true!

This is an extreme example, but we are reminded of Harry Findlay backing Denman at Bangor where he staked £360,000 to win £33,000. When he arrived at the course Denman was 1/9 but started at 1/12, Findlay believes he would be 1/25 if the race was ran today. The gambler has always claimed that was the easiest £33,000 he has ever won. We backed Constitution Hill to win the Champion Hurdle at 4/9 - was that not value?

These days we never wager without watching previous race/races pertaining first. We never fully trust a third party's comments/opinions, though sensibly we incorporate those sentiments into our thought processes.

Watching replays in preparation for a wager, we mute the sound for the first viewing, make personal notes, then listen to the commentator and the accompanied comments after. Our view can be at odds in a massive sense with those of the commentator, or the comments scribed after the race by journalists. Of course, calling the race means they will have to describe the action as a whole, and not the specific things we are looking for.

The point we are making today is we would rather make our own mistake than those of Paul Kealy. Given his proclamation on prices how can we take the man seriously going forward? 

We try to be professional all of the time, we fail in that regard, but we are professional most of the time. For example, when our prescribed rationale is proven wrong or falls short, as opposed to a losing bet, we hurt and take an emotional hit! We know that is silly and wrong, but at 72 not much is going to change from here. BUT, we are secure in the knowledge we are part of the 2% and have something meaningful to offer our members!

***