The home of intelligent horse racing discussion
The home of intelligent horse racing discussion

Tote Exacta at Catterick

Home Forums Horse Racing Tote Exacta at Catterick

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #27143
    Avatar photoCav
    Participant
    • Total Posts 4833

    Is the race 3 exacta correct???

    1st 66/1
    2nd 66/1

    Div – 701.80

    Cant be right surely?

    #497287
    Glenn
    Participant
    • Total Posts 2003

    Why can’t it be right?

    #497289
    Avatar photoCav
    Participant
    • Total Posts 4833

    Thought they were missing a zero.

    Jesus that’s a dreadful div.

    #497291
    Glenn
    Participant
    • Total Posts 2003

    You sound like a man who’s bemused as to why this or that horse is ‘so short’ before it goes and trots up. Maybe the shrewd set that play exactas had a much better idea of this combo copping than you did?

    #497292
    Peruvian Chief
    Member
    • Total Posts 1931

    What did the FC pay? How is it calculated?

    #497295
    bimble
    Participant
    • Total Posts 77

    £2082.24

    #497300
    Avatar photophil walker
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1374

    Betting was:

    Evens
    5/2
    11/1 bar

    Maybe people realized that Tom Scu never wins when riding for Brian Ellison (and is generally a useless jockey anyway) so thought the 66/1 outsiders weren’t no-hopers.

    #497301
    Glenn
    Participant
    • Total Posts 2003

    What did the FC pay? How is it calculated?

    The CSF is based on SPs, but with the added twist of

    Frankenstein algorithims

    to ensure you get a truly dreadful deal.

    So in this case, they’d multiply 66*(66+1) and get 4422. Then the harmonisation algorithim will kick in (aka the ‘we don’t wanna give you that’ algorithim) to slash the return by more than half.

    Whatever you do folks, give these Frankenstein CSFs the bodyswerve and stick to the weight-of-money derived exacta.

    #497344
    Avatar photobetlarge
    Participant
    • Total Posts 2806

    So in this case, they’d multiply 66*(66+1) and get 4422. Then the harmonisation algorithim will kick in (aka the ‘we don’t wanna give you that’ algorithim) to slash the return by more than half.

    The CSF was a licence to print it back in the day.

    Then came the Little Owl/Venture To Cognac affair and joy turned to despair.

    Mike

    #497352
    Avatar photoCav
    Participant
    • Total Posts 4833

    "You sound like a man who’s bemused as to why this or that horse is ‘so short’ before it goes and trots up. Maybe the shrewd set that play exactas had a much better idea of this combo copping than you did?"

    Not at all. I’ve been espousing the use of exchange data and price movement on here for years.

    Could be wrong of course, but I don’t see any shrewdie playing at 700/1 in a 4000/1+, Catterick sixteen runner juvenile hurdle market!

    Nor am I saying this is a representative exacta dividend at those sort of odds. I don’t have the data to draw that conclusion.

    Looks more like a name picker having their day in the sun, or finger trouble, or both.

    In any event, it’s a dreadful dividend on this particular occasion imo.

    #497380
    Avatar photoRedRum77
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1533

    Not sure here, but it could be first or second with any other.

    #497395
    Avatar photogrey dolphin
    Participant
    • Total Posts 650

    How much was in the pool? For races at these small meetings midweek that is probably the main limitation.

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.