Hi, Chinbok.

I had assumed you were looking at the top selection using the default settings and not referring to the Lay method. It would now seem that the method might not be all that good. I also assume you looked at all faves, not just limiting them to those under $4.00?

As your Unitab figures showed a slightly less of a LOT than the neurals I decided to look at the Unitab ratings applying the same Lay rules to it. I identified a selection if it was not in the top 33% of the ratings. For example, if there were 9 runners in a race and Unitab only rated the under $4 pre-post fave as their fourth selection, it then became a Lay selection. Unfortunately I have only the info going back to Thurs 26 Jan and not Wed 25 as I have with the neurals. Anyway, since Thursday to yesterday there have been 28 Unitab Lay selections for 3 winners totalling $9.60. For the same period, the neurals have had 33 selections for 4 winners totalling $14.00. Laying them on Betfair would have produced a healthy profit for both systems even allowing for the 33% premium which I think may not be too unrealistic. Maybe someone has figures which could confirm/deny this?

I am under the impression that Unitab are provided their ratings from AAP which also owns the neurals, so I expected most of the selections to be mutual, but this was not the case. So from today I'll also list the Unitab selections. You will see that neither method today have mutual selections.

Neurals
Stawell R5 no.2 - Kingster Blue ($2.50)

Unitab
Scone R3 no.2 - Chester County ($3.20)
Scone R4 no.1 - Montecito ($3.50)
Rocky R4 no.1 - Cee Jay Tee ($2.30)