People in the gallops certainly are used to that Kevin and HRV has made it clear the aim is to find ways to reduce long odds-on favs.

From my own personal observations having followed both codes most of my life, it's not correct to think trots markets should be the same as gallops markets. To really use a simplified argument before I go on, I could say Australian rules football is one of the most popular forms of gambling in Australia and punters there are not afraid of two-horse fields with generally one long odds-on favourite! Footy punters know what they are getting and they sign up for it when they place a wager.

In the trots, I will have more 1 unit win x 3 units place bets if I'm taking on a favourite, whereas in the gallops if I'm taking on a favourite I might simply play each-way. Reason for this is generally favourites in the trots are - and this is as traditional as stand-starts or hot chips on race day - shorter than in the gallops.

Just because they are "shorter than in the gallops" however, doesn't necessarily mean that is a huge negative. The feedback from wagering service providers tells us the sweet spot for a favourite's price to produce optimum turnover - and thus maximum return to the industry - is about $1.8 to $2.5 (give or take). So technically "odds-on favourites" are not dirty words, but admittedly $1.45 to $1.8 is not ideal, and $1.4 and shorter is detrimental to turnover, and thus returns to industry.