I’ll have to admit up front that I’ve never really understood betting odds – and as a consequence have never spent much time down the bookies putting a pony or a monkey on a sure thing in the 4.30 at Redcar.

While my lack of understanding – and cynical belief that the odds are always stacked strongly against the punter – means that I’ve been able to avoid the vagaries of the betting shop simply by never going there, like most farmers this year it appears that there’s no avoiding the lottery inherent in the sterling exchange rate.

So, I’d have to admit that trying to work out the rationale behind those professional gamblers who have been operating in the international financial exchange rate market over the course of recent weeks is probably way beyond me.

For while the all-important £/€ rate sat at just over 91p to the € at the beginning of September (having hit a low of 93p just when we were all busy with the harvest in August) the pound has been strengthening quite markedly over the course of the current month and earlier in the week was hitting a five-month high of around 88p to the €.

This is of more than academic interest because the average rate over the course of September is used to set the exchange rate for our farm support payments. While this is possibly a slightly fairer way than the 'one-day-wonder' which was used in the past, it’s still apparently prone to fairly wide swings based on little more than sentiment in a pretty febrile market.

This year has actually been the first time for many years that I ticked the 'take payments in sterling' box on the SAF form as I thought that it was a pretty safe bet that we’d be out of Europe by the time the payments were being made. In previous claims, I’d been of the opinion that having a whole year to pick the best exchange rate was better than being confined to the one day or one month option.

While I’d have to admit that the sheer stress of keeping a constant eye on the exchange rate often wore thin, I would guess that we had a mixed degree of success in beating the national figure over the years. I’d have to add, though, that it always grated more than a little just how much bank charges always seemed to cut into any hint of a profit in the ensuing conversion transactions.

However, despite hoping I’d be able to avoid these bank charges along with some of the anxieties of keeping a constant watch on the financial markets by ticking the Sterling box this year, I’ve still been at a bit at a loss when trying to work out what has been driving the swing over the course of the current month.

For while I could see that the mid-August dip in the value of Sterling was in all probability due to the sudden realisation that a no-deal Brexit looked to be on the cards, I’m not entirely sure what has made this look less likely and boosted confidence that it might not happen over the intervening days of September.

Of course, when you have to juggle with issues such as the sentiment at the Labour Party Conference and the ruling of the Supreme Court on the legality of Boris Johnson’s proroguing of Parliament and the knock-on consequences of the attacks on Saudi oil refineries things are never going to be straightforward … are they?

Changing subject somewhat, I would, however, be happy enough to offer a few tips to any arable farmer who might be betting on getting a big cash injection as a result of the proposed settlement announced the other week on the hoary old long-running convergence chestnut.

That tip would be 'don’t bank on it'. For while the £160m promised for the industry – together with the £51m set to come our way under the Bew Review – does look like it might actually be delivered, the mood music certainly doesn’t point to much of it making its way directly to grain and cropping farmers.

But it is worth flagging up the fact that the average area payment on cropping land in Scotland stands well behind that in other parts of the UK – despite the fact that the weather means our harvesting and drying costs are often well above those encountered in other parts of the UK.

It’s also worth remembering that while the award of the convergence funding has sometimes been portrayed as a big cash win for Scotland’s farmers, this doesn’t really paint a true picture. While the money is undoubtedly considerable, it is only compensation for the way in which Scotland’s farmers have been short-changed in the past – a bit like getting a PPI payment back from your mortgage company.

But the fact that the money is to be additional funding – rather than producers in other UK regions being asked to repay their additional awards – actually means that those in the other regions who received additional cash over the long term were the real winners.

And, perversely, the fact that the convergence cash is additional money being put into the sector could spell trouble for payment being made if the UK finds itself remaining in the EU in the longer term.

For there are fairly strict rules on the payments of additional state aid – and outwith exceptional circumstances which have to be agreed up front with the EU these have to fall under the 'de minimus' rules, which I believe should see them fall below any level which would have any disruption on the EU’s internal market.

While I’m be speaking well above my paygrade here, as far as I can see that would equate to a maximum of €15,000 over a period of three years across all schemes, a fact which might stymie the payments being made in the substantial lump sum which many in the industry are hoping for.

I may just be overcomplicating things though – and with NFU Scotland holding a board meeting this week to decide on the best way to ensure the convergence cash is fairly allocated across the industry, everything might be sorted out to everyone’s satisfaction shortly.

But, I wouldn’t bet on it …