Just because a horse is odds-on doesn't mean its no value??????????

If a horse has an est. 90% chance of winning, a $1.60 win div is "good value".
60% return vs small chance of losing.

I have backed horses paying $1.20 a win - they were value cause the opposition was many lengths inferior - easy money.

A horse at 20/1 is "no value" if it has no hope in hell of winning. Some 20/1 horses fit into that category.

Agree with Big Orange - if LJ is racing against ordinary horses then odds-on may be value. If its racing against some handy horses then odds-on may well be poor value.

It all depends on the opposition.

Was Kingston Town bad value when he won about 16 races in a row at odds-on - when clearly he was almost certain to win.

Backing horses because they are more than 10/1 is poor value, unless they have a real chance of winning.

It may be a good idea to back horses above $4 most of the time, however there are times when a short priced horse is good value.

You're wrong on this one dude.

If there is a $10 note lying on the footpath - do you walk past it because its "bad value" compared to a $100 note?

I backed Sir Breakfast on Monday cause the place div was better than LJ's win div.

However, if I considered LJ a 90% chance of winning and it was paying $1.60 a win vs a place div of $1.40 for another horse given an 80% chance of placing - I'd back LJ everytime.