I'm still laying the Sky non-selections on the horses and have not yet been hit with a losing day - touch wood!

However, I've also been looking at the greyhound ratings. So far, if there is a gap of at least 30 points between the top rated and the second rated selection then the Place results have been quite profitable, so too the strike rate.

It would be expected that the divvy would be very skinny but surprisingly this is not necessarily true. For example, last night there were five selections. They all placed, and the NSW TAB divvies were $2.00, $1.50, $1.10, $1.40 and $1.80.

Has anyone got records of the greyhound ratings and results?

If anyone's interested, today's selections are:

Casino R5 no.1
Casino R9 no.2
Richmond R8 no.3
Traralgon R1 no.5
Traralgon R5 no.4
Wangaratta R1 no.2 (Already run. It placed paying $1.04).

Always interested in your efforts Michael

Thanks, Mancunian.

You'd expect the strike rate to be very high but as to the divvies? - time will tell.

Anyone know of a bookie who gives the highest Place TAB divvie or the best of two TABs for the 'hounds?

$1.04 ???

WOW!!!

Obviously a very slow way to make a Profit.
Hope you live long enough to spend the winnings.

I had a play at place Punting , but those ridiculous small pools killed me.
The approximates aren't even that!
Could pay anything at any time.
But $1.04 is about usual.

Good luck with it, but I suggest you stick with what was working.

Hi, Mooeee.

There was another success that paid $1.04. However the system showed a profit of $0.08 thanks to divvies on the other selections. I'll continue to follow the system and hope the divvies aren't too disappointing.

No selections today.

Six selections today:

Angle Park R5 no.4
Cranbourne R1 no.4
Granbourne R2 no.4
Geelong R5 no.1
Geelong R9 no.2
Launceston R6 no.6

Lucky to get $1.04. On Unitab, there is no such thing as $1.04. For example, if your dog/horse should theoretically be paying $1.09, they round it all the way down to $1.00, so you just get your money back.

I'm quite certain a law was enacted here in NSW in the '70's that if your selection won then you had to show a profit.

However that does not excuse the way divvies here are calculated. A 50 cent divvy is originally assumed and then rounded down by a multiple of 10 cents. It is now doubled for the declared divvy.

For example, a 50 cent winning ticket after the TAB 15% (approx) might pay a true $0.99 but is then rounded down to $0.90, instead of $0.95. The $0.90 is then doubled to $1.80 which is the divvy declared by the TAB.

Yet if it was calulated on a $1 basis, the true divvy would be $1.98 which is then rounded down to $1.90 - not the TAB's declared divvy of $1.80. The smaller the divvy then generally the greater profit percentagewise for the TAB. In reality, many of the $1.04 divvies should pay $1.10, approx half of the $1.10 divvies should pay $1.20, etc.

I am under the strong impression the other TABs do not calculate their divvies using this method?

Are you sure? I can't believe that. I assumed that all tabs worked it out on the basis of $1 units. Unitab certainly does.