Dariana returns after failing to jump from the barriers last Saturday, when favourite for the Queensland Oaks. The antics of the filly with "The Bart factor" cost punters a fortune, but in the end, it was just another way that you can do your dough while punting. (Photo Dan Costello)

Once or twice a year I pen an article here for readers, just to reiterate my thoughts that “you’ll never beat the house in the long term.”

Every time I write an article like this, I get one or two professional punters emailing me and advising “I win betting, or else I wouldn’t have been a professional punter for the last 15 years” – and so on and so forth. There may well be the odd punter, as in point something of one per cent, who do win long term backing racehorses, pacers or greyhounds, however 99.9% of punters will lose over the period of a year, or their entire lifetime.

The reasons a punter loses over the space of a year are many and varied, but for the most part, punters lose because they lack any sort of discipline. They find it impossible to stand at a Pubtab outlet and have two or three bets in an afternoon. Many have to have a bet in every race that is being run, but rest assured they’ll finish up at the Salvation Army for a free feed on Christmas Day as they simply can’t back enough winners to survive.

Sit down any night of the week and have a look at the huge variations in dividends across the main three TAB’s in the country – and it’s obscene. As a punter, by Murphy’s Law, you’ll be on the pacer or greyhound in the State where it’s paying the worst dividend, so even if you do manage to back number four, with the blue rug, in the sixth at Cranbourne, it will pay $5.70 for a win in the State where you backed it, $8.20 on the one up north of where you’re sitting and 6.40 on the one down south, so you got dudded again. It doesn’t look like much of a difference on first observations, but if you had a $100 on it at $5.70 you obviously get back $570, whereas the same $100 on the State where it paid $8.20 would have returned you $820, the difference being $250. The moral is the sooner a national pool happens the better, because until that happens, punters are costing themselves a lot of money through playing Russian roulette, unless you can get a “best of three totes” for night meetings among the corporates, the odds of which are about a million to one - and drifting. And don’t think takings unders at your TAB is restricted to night meetings either, as the same thing happens Saturday afternoon as huge variations in Trifecta and First 4 dividends are the order of the day. You’d be absolutely filthy if you had been good enough to select the First 4 in the Stradbroke next Saturday, only to find it paid $15,000 or $25,000 more down over the border from where you had your bet. It’s all so stupid, for as I’ve stated here numerous times before – surely to goodness with A) modern computer technology and B) governments who can see the benefits of combined pools, can amend the relevant gaming legislation to allow national pools to become a reality - with the State where the bet is placed getting its correct percentage.

TAB’s and indeed racing in general, constantly complains that the corporates are bludging on the system and that they are putting nothing back into racing, yet they do cumulatively nothing to come up with a solution to the problem. Blind Freddie - accompanied by a Labrador and holding on to a white cane - could come up with a way to have a national TAB pool, such that if the First 4 bet on the Stradbroke was put through a TAB terminal in Brisbane, the Queensland government would get their tax share, or if the First 4 bet went through a TAB terminal at Bathurst, the New South Wales government get their appropriate percentage, or if a First 4 bet gets put through a terminal in Bendigo, the Victorian government get their share. What in the world is difficult about that idea? Until that happens, punters nationally, who are supposedly the “valued clients” of these said TAB’s, are the unfortunate ones that are getting shafted. The punter becomes understandably very discontented when he or she accepts that they are paying Russian roulette by betting into their home TAB pool with exotics, or even each way bets, so they move their business to the corporates, who only have to pay “best of two totes” to get the punters business - as at least that way the poor old maligned punter has a 66.6% chance of getting a better dividend, as they at least have two of the three TAB bases covered. So until we have a national TAB pool “you’ll never beat the house in the long term”, because by Murphy’s Law, you will continually be betting in the State that returns the lowest dividend.

Last Saturday Oaks Day meeting at Eagle Farm should have proven conclusively yet again to punters why “you’ll never beat the house in the long term,” as any punter who backed either Latin News or Dariana should have collected, but at the end of the day the punters return, if he or she was astute enough to have $100 on both, was to lose $200. Latin News was a certainty beaten, with jockey Michael Cahill telling Steve Hewlett on a RadioTAB interview last Tuesday morning that he thought, even though “I’m conservative,” that Latin News “would have won by four lengths” (if he’d got out of the pocket he was in). Re Dariana, she’d had to have beaten that legless bunch in the Oaks, if she had a leg hanging off each end of her body – not that she’s much good either, but simply by virtue of the fact of the overall slow times and slow last 600-metre sectionals that the Oaks field that did exit the barriers, were capable of running.

Then yesterday the final field for the Stradbroke was announced – and naturally fixed odds operators went up with their market, subsequent to the barrier draw. Last Saturday’s unlucky runner Latin News was named first emergency Saturday in the Stradbroke, so on the balance of probability he won’t get a run. However he was $10 each way fixed odds yesterday morning in “All In” betting for the Stradbroke and now he’s suddenly $7.50. Don’t think for one minute that he’s been backed into that price, but through firming his price into 13/2, these fixed odds operators now fatten their already bulging wallets though the 13/2 price simply allowing a bigger deduction than the 9/1 price he was before final acceptances, so the punter is stuffed again. In fact, as I’ve alluded to here before, there is absolutely nothing to stop the fixed price operators, should they so desire, pricing Latin News at $5 right now, so that they can make even bigger deductions when he doesn’t get a run. So even if by some fluke a punter backs the eventual winner of the Stradbroke today, when that punter is finally paid out, deductions will apply, such that the measly $2.80 today that is available about the short priced favourite Whobegotyou won’t be paid out at $2.80, due to those amazing deductions. If you think that the deductions aspect isn’t a minefield, well take the time to check out this Caulfield stewards report - at the end of the text where it is headed “Futures Deductions” involving a recent Brisbane meeting, by clicking on this thread: http://www.racingvictoria.net.au/stewards/stewardsReport_5021.aspx

So whilst the defeats of Latin News and Dariana cost punters around Australia an inestimable amount of a say a million dollars or so last Saturday, their misfortune in their respective race, at least demonstrated just two of the 600-odd variables of racing that all come into play, at various times, to ensure “you’ll never beat the house in the long term.”

In racing what about the variable of the trainer, the jockey and the stewards all having different versions of events? So it’s not ancient history, take last Saturday morning for instance. RadioTAB anchor Steve Hewlett interviewed the trainer of Wealth Princess, Brent Gillovic. He inferred his mare was right to rock and roll that afternoon at Eagle Farm and suggested to the listening audience that the dry track would suit her better. That was certainly a good leg up for punters to have a bet on her. The problem was that I was receiving emails from New Zealand Friday night and Saturday morning to say that Wealth Princess had been “injured” since her last run. In fact the husband of respected Kiwi trainer Karen Zimmerman, who had Barinka in the same Eagle Farm race, wrote on Race Café in New Zealand on Friday “Perhaps they heard about the injury to WP (Wealth Princess), hope all is well now and we would be pretty happy to run the quinella”. The “injury” one may logically conclude may revolve around the mare Wealth Princess having a cut in her mouth and the stewards report from the day certainly advises that the trainer must have reported that “injury” - as their stewards report subsequent to the race states: “It was reported by B. Gillovic, the trainer of WEALTH PRINCESS, that the mare had a laceration to its tongue. WEALTH PRINCESS was examined by the Club's veterinary surgeon and cleared to race, although it will be examined again at the barriers. WEALTH PRINCESS underwent a further veterinary examination at the barriers and was cleared to start”.

Now the stewards report doesn’t say if the trainer advised the stewards a week before the race, or five minutes after she walked into the enclosure, which is a shame. Subsequent to the race, Chairman of Stewards Wade Birch was asked on radio, on Tuesday morning, if the mare had missed any work to which he replied “No, she didn’t miss any work, she had the vet to her a couple of times during the week as a result of that laceration to the tongue. Ah, we had our veterinary surgeon look at the horse prior to its arrival on course and again round at the barriers and um, um, she was fine and fit to compete”. So the trainer hasn’t mentioned that Wealth Princess missed any work in his radio interview, the Chief Steward says she didn’t miss any work, yet jockey Michael Walker who rode her in the race last Saturday - subsequent to the race - told Sydney Morning Herald journalist Chris Roots, “She has had that problem with her mouth and missed a bit of work, so I was very happy with that” (to run when third to Set For Fame). Oh really Mr Walker, so the mare did miss some work – thanks for telling us, but the problem is we punters would have preferred to have that information prior to the race, not after it. Maybe that’s why she loomed to win in the home straight then ran out of nick? Maybe that is also why she blew in the market officially from $3.70 to $4.20 as those in the know may have known she “missed a bit of work”. The full article where that quote of Michael Walker’s comes from, can he read by clicking HERE. So punters drew the short straw again - if Michael Walker’s statement is correct, as had they known that she had in fact “missed a bit of work”, they may have preferred not to bet on the mare. It is understandable how a racehorse with a cut tongue could “miss a bit of work”, as if a bit was put in the horse’s mouth, it could cause further injury to the tongue, whereas the horse could be exercised in such a way as to 1) avoid the use of a bit and 2) having a trackwork rider aboard.

It gets no better for punters who take notice of Form Guides. Take the popular Best Bets publication last weekend. It stated of Eagle Farm runner Tromo that he “scorched home breaking 33 seconds (for his last 600) to overhaul the leaders” (at his previous start at Rosehill), but as I’ve written here a dozen times before, don’t waste your time looking at the Sydney sectional times that are put up on the TVN website, or elsewhere. As a matter of interest, I went back and checked and that website attributes Tromso getting home his last 600 that day (22/5/10) in 32.74 on a “dead 5” track, which would be a pretty remarkable effort - so that statement re 32.74 alone would steer punters into backing the horse, but unfortunately for punters the horse ran nothing like, that according to my report that went out to my clients – and I can assure you they had the correct time Tromso ran. I really wish media outlets would stop quoting sectional times displayed elsewhere as being accurate, when they aren’t. For starters, I’d hardly have clients in six countries, if the sectional times that all industry participants could get for free in Sydney and Melbourne were actually accurate.

If you think my statement that “you’ll never beat the house long term” only relates to backing equine or canine athletes, rest assured it doesn’t - as the punter can’t possibly win long term on any other gambling entity either. Poker machines, Lotto, Keno, sports betting, casinos or any other allied gambling activity you can think of, are not designed for the punter to win on. Some even rip you off while taking your money. As I’ve written here for years how unethical is it that you can put one dollar in a poker machine, get 20 cents back – and the stupid machine tells you you’ve had a “win (of) 20” cents, when in fact you’ve lost 80 cents? How can governments be deemed to be fair dinkum about any aspect of their operation when they allow that sort of falseness to continue unabated?

Regularly backing the winner of a football match - which has only two teams - is almost impossible. You could have backed the “unbeatable” Australian Sam Stosur at $1.16 to win the French Open last Saturday night, but unfortunately for her supporters, she ran second in the two-horse race to Francesca Schiavone. You could have backed the first odds-on favourite at the ponies last Saturday – and you didn’t have to wait long for a bet, as it was in Race 1 at Flemington- and was named Liveandletdie. All the usual urgers got behind it, telling everyone how good it was and reiterating that it had “the Kav factor” and the rest of the crap “they” continually prattle on about and sure enough it went over at $1.80 to a first starter.

Always bear the aforesaid article in mind whenever you are having a bet – and always remember “you’ll never beat the house in the long term”. That’s not being negative, that’s just being straight down the line and calling a spade a spade – and not a shovel.