1.TUFFAZ ALLEN
Has ability but is very erratic in performance.
Does have a reasonable record at THE MEADOWS though.
Four starts ago came out of BOX 1 here and rated a 17.9 in finishing 3rd.
Ran poorly twice since gives a penalty of 2.5 makes a Final rating of (20.4)

2.CUNNING LAD
Quick beginner very suitably drawn.
Has won one of two starts here.
Rated a 17.4 winning here 2 starts ago.
Unplaced last run gives a penalty of 0.9 making a Final Rating of (18.3)

3.FLIGHTNING
Very small bitch that tends to get knocked over a fair bit.
Does all her racing in town.
Rated a 21.6 three starts ago and has performed better at Sandown.
Give a 0.8 bonus for improvement gives a Final rating of (20.8)

4.SERBO CHARGED
Only the four starts to never miss a place.
Yet to win in town but ran second in both starts in maiden races here.
Rated 19.5 at it's very first start here.
Failed three times since gives a penalty of 2.1.Final rating (21.6)

5.ONE PLEDGE
Just out of Maiden Class but is improving in ability.
Small bitch usually keeps out of harms way.
Rated 16.5 last start here.
BOX penalty of 2.1 gives a Final rating of (18.6)

6.BOT FLYER
Three starts here for two seconds.
Overall a capable but very inconsistent performer
Rated a 16 here four starts ago
Penalized 2 for BOX and 2.3 for inconsistency gives Final rating (20.3)

7.DYNA MANN
Two starts here for a Maiden heat and final win
Both out of this very box but in slow times.
Rated 18.9 at it's first win but expect improvement
Learning to race and give a bonus of 1.3 gives Final rating (17.6)

8.ISSI AUSSIE
Very consistent performer having first run here
Has a win in good time at Sandown
Rated 14.6 at Sandown six starts ago
0.7 penalty for first start at the track is a Final rating of (15.3)

9.MEREY LASS
First start in town.
Seems like a dog prepared to have a go but hard to catch
Rated 19.8 when began slowly at Geelong two starts ago
Averaging that run and the following run give Final rating (16.3)

10.ORTOBE
Lovely name.Second attempt in town after failing
Definately improving in ability.
Rated 16.5 at Geelong recently then continues to run well
Unfamiliar with circuit gives a penalty of 0.9 and Final rating (17.4)


Margins converted to prices gives this assessment

1. - $27.2
2. - $11.7
3. - $31.9
4. - $43.9
5. - $13.2
6. - $26.1
7. - $8.8
8. - $3.5
9. - $5.3
10.- $8.2

Of course there will be at least 2 scratchings so the prices need to be adjusted to suit.
They are set to 100%

Race 1. The Meadows.Assessed and needed prices.

1. - $18.3 ($68)
2. - $7.9 ($17)
3. - $21.5 ($90)
4. - $29.6 ($160)
5. - $8.9 ($20)
6. - $17.6 ($64)
7. - $6.7 ($13)
8. - $2.4 ($3.35)

Seems a lot of good,hard work has gone out the window studying this race as no value found.
Perhaps the PINK may come up at suitable odds!


There is a staying race at the Meadows tonight so I thought I would have a go at rating it.
My calculated prices have come up with obvious and glaring errors.

I've been going by a universal criteria of the dog's rating is calculated by subtracting its time from the track record time.
This seems to work reasonably well when comparing races at the same track.
But it seems it is much easier for a dog to run closer to the record at the minor tracks.
This appears to be that the track record at the minor tracks would have been lower had the distance been attempted by the dogs that ran the records at the city tracks.
A lower class of dog usually runs at the country tracks.
As the dog shows outstanding ability,it continues its career in the city and the country tracks don't get a chance to have their records lowered.

The good thing about RATINGS is you should be able to compare performances from different tracks over different distances and even from different eras.
There quite possibly is a formula more accurate than subtracting from the race record time.Perhaps subtracting from the overall average race time,but I think the results would be the same.

I have now decided that the benchmark time to be used is found by subtracting 1/100ths of seconds from the track records until the Ratings look about right.
So if,for example,smart dogs win at Sandown at 0.6 seconds outside the track record and run 0.3 seconds outside the record at Geelong,then instead of using the track record at Geelong as a base I will use that time minus 0.3 seconds.

BRILLIANT!
SEE YOU AT THE FRONT OF THE COLLECT WINDOW QUEUE!

Mooee - that's inspirational stuff, it really is. And those people who scoff, take your lips off one another's a*ses and enjoy Mooee having the balls to publish his voyage of discovery here on the site.

Dr Pangloss - if you were any more of a wan ker you'd be arrested for public indecency. "Wrong. Wrong. Wrong." you said. "Well I thought everyone knew that but it appears there's an odd one out." Mate if you were in a real betting ring, you'd be the odd one out. Not in a long time have I read something so insulting and inexcusably degrading as your appraisal of Mooee's thoughts. Fair dinkum - if I was in the same room as you and you said that to any other person I'd rip you apart, and I don't mean physically. Your narrow mindedness is matched only by your smugness and misplaced self belief. But enough about you, you're a waste of space.

Mooee: don't use track records. They vary greatly. You were on the right path when you said to find average times. What you would be better off doing is finding a reliable track (in Victoria I'd choose Geelong, good class, plenty of racing, always about the same level) find the median (using only the 457m trip of course) for the various grades, and that gives you the difference in lengths between the classes (at Geelong). You can apply those class differences to all the provincial tracks. Next, find the median of all the grade 5's at all the tracks. (use grade 5's because biggest sample size). To all those median times add the difference b/w the G5 and the FFA median times, and you have a STD FFA time for all tracks. Now all you need to do is work out how STRONG or WEAK each of those times is. Obviously, a FFA at Sandown on a Thursday is stronger than a FFA at Wang on a Sat. This part I won't reveal on here but that's something you need to discover. Once you have that, you have a STD FFA time for EVERY track and distance, and a figure for what each of those is worth. The easy way then is to call the Sandown Thursday night and Meadows Saturday night FFA time a 100 (lengths), and to adjust the others accordingly. If you thought track X was 4 lengths inferior to the Sandown FFA, then lower it's FFA std by 4 lengths (0.23 seconds) and you have a time which reflects what a 100 length rater (ie a winner of a Sandown Thursday night FFA in STD time) would rate at that track. Then, you have what you envisioned - a way of comparing all dogs over all distances and all tracks.

Keep me posted with how you're going.

As it appeared after assessment,there were no over the odds selections in the Race 1 at the Meadows so I count that as a win for the ratings.

QUOTE

"There is a staying race at the Meadows tonight so I thought I would have a go at rating it.
My calculated prices have come up with obvious and glaring errors."

ENDQUOTE

Seems my glaring and obvious errors weren't huge errors after all.
Had the Yellow at Even money and the Blue at 4 to 1.
Blue wins easily and the Yellow gets brought down at the home turn after working into second place.
From what I am learning,and from last years disastrous effort,Their is no money to be made by backing the fastest or the fittest dogs.
The money seems to be given to the backers of the most consistent dogs.

I'll see what I can find for SALE on Sunday.

Yes I know no-one is interested,but I am!

I'm interested Mooee, keep going at it.

Thanks for the leg up Duritz.
I'm going where probably many others have been before I suppose.
Don Scott got where he was bu studying the handicappers weight scales.
But still a maiden at Donald one week isn't the same as a maiden at Donald 2 weeks later.
This is the hard bit.

moeee,

I'm interested mate, keep at it, you are attempting something that not many are able to make successful.

The fact that you are posting your method "warts and all" is to be commended, not derided.

Have you read greg's punting page? This may enlighten you a little further or give you more ideas. I can't post the link, but a Google will find it.

I believe it is possible to use track records, but only with adjustments. A track record at Geelong is not the same as a track record at Sale, you might make an adjustment for the track variants.

The main problem one faces is the sh*t happens factor with greyhounds. Dogs get carted off the track or wiped out, through no fault of their own.

I reckon you might look at early splits rather than race time and do pace ratings, the likely leader.

How many times has the dog led in the first split?

A dog that can ping out from the boxes has the huge advantage regardless of actual race time, BUT must have the class to win.
If you can pin down the likely leaders, that have a high win strike rate, you could probably rate from there.

Instead of looking for dogs that led all the way to win last start, you should probably look for dogs that have a high strike rate of leading and winning, but did NOT win last time out, that's where the value is I think.

It's extremely hard to find value with the greyhounds, but you will when there is a short priced favourite that is vulnerable. I.E. it won it's last start well, but there was a skirmish which gave him a clear run, and normally he would not have got the lead.

Just some of my thoughts.

__________________
RaceCensus - powerful system testing software.
Now with over 420,000 Metropolitan, Provincial and Country races!
http://www.propun.com.au/horse_raci...ng_systems.html
*RaceCensus now updated to 30/06/2025
Video overview of RaceCensus here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W821YP_b0Pg

Duritz
I'm hearing what you are saying,but becareful when you make statements like "Track records vary greatly".
If the statement is untrue,then everything based on it will also be untrue.
Track record is actually quite stable and is a very good starting point.
But your mention of the average grade five time is also very stable and would also be a good starting point.
I don't wish to throw away my progress in favour of your suggestion just yet.But I did have a play with your idea and found it suggests an order of class for each track/distance combination.
The 2 city tracks about equal with Geelong.

QUOTE "Now all you need to do is work out how STRONG or WEAK each of those times is." ENDQUOTE

Pretty much what the whole procedure is about!

I find that rating dogs shows up the differences between tracks.And am finding the "strength and weakness" of fields is being reflected in the ratings.Sometimes they appear just plain wrong.
Like the Healesville ratings using the track record continually throws up ratings way over their ability.
I just play around until they get close to looking right.
And the more animals I rate the more accurate my benchmark will be.
I can see some sort of a shortcut in your proposal,DURITZ,but I'm having a ball doing it my way.

Chrome Prince.
Nearly everything you mentioned in your post is infinite wisdom.
But the key is to turn all that wisdom into numbers.
Because that is how mathematics works.
If you could turn all what you suggested into figures,you would be very successful.Or even more successful.
Yes an reading Greg's page,but so is every other punter.
I am following a plan and am putting it up when it shows promise.
MAKE THAT IF!

Anyway I got the first 3 at SALE to post.
So you can cheer 'em home for me if you would.

SALE RACE 1
1. First starter.No rating.
2. Done nothing at its only start 36.16
3. Rated on performance at Healesville 21.33
4. Rated 17.3 first up.Failed twice since 18.8
5. Averaged his last two ratings 22.16
6. Done nothing but get tired so far 33.9
7. Placed first up but done nothing since 26.35
8. Averaged the only two ratings 23.41

Very poor field but surprisingly is not too bad a betting race 50%

Take $2.35 the Blue for $28
Take $9 the White for $10

SALE RACE 2
1. Ran okay time in a 311m quali. 12.32
2. Rated 19 and then failed 21.97
3. Only one run 16.48
4. Done nothing from the cherry 1st start 26.24
5. Had 22 chances and still a maiden 18.67
6. Runs okay over the real shorts 19.53
7. Seems to prefer the inside 23.31
8. Shocking form 25.68

Terrible race 20%

Take $1.65 the RED for $15

SALE RACE 3
1. Won at Evens 2 runs ago.Failed big odds other runs 26.29
2. Form looks a lot better than it is 23.68
3. Best dog but prefers further 19.71
4. Form looks a lot worse than it is 20.65
5. Prefers it further but is better than these 16.82
6. Not suited out this wide 24.52
7. Form very hard to follow 25.09
8. Averaging the last two ratings 19.36

Plenty of shocking form to read 80%

Take $2.70 the Yellow for $18 Each/way
Take $10.60 the PINK for $7 Each/way