Csf Trial

Certainly the formula for tricasts was changed after certain individuals took advantage of the draw bias in sprints at Thirsk in particular, and probably Beverley and others.

I would have thought CSF's formulas were altered accordingly.

Even though the odds on offer for well drawn horses are shortened anyway to take in to account their advantage, thereby reducing potential dividends on well drawn 1-2-3's, it was felt necessary to alter the formulas aswell, as people were still winning too much, the rotters.
 
What was the old guesstimate-calculation for CSF dividends ?

In the days when I was a betting shop regular and someone had a forecast up they would do the sum and state what it should pay, before announcing they had been robbed when it paid loads less than it should !

something to do with adding one, and multiplying by two somewhere!
Rory ?!
 
Thats the one!

Should pay that !

( 3 minutes later ) ...

Fucking robbing ###### ! 8/1 and a 10/1, fucking 56quid, cheating fuckers!
 
Bet365 offer sfc odds on all races that they have prices for, I haven't looked at their formula in detail, but I would imagine it's a bit cruder than the sfc itself.
 
Originally posted by betsmate+Dec 12 2007, 07:46 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (betsmate @ Dec 12 2007, 07:46 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Honest Tom@Dec 12 2007, 06:40 PM
the csf takes no account of the draw
Click to expand...
Is this correct? The article that I posted above says that the formula was changed. [/b][/quote]
I'll guarantee you it doesn't bestmate. I remember the Wokingham mentioned in that article well (was on the csf myself) and BOLA were later forced into a humiliating climbdown as regards the csf supposedly being affected by the draw. The actual reason that Wokingham csf was so bad was because the csf shortened the price of all runners if the book overround didn't meet with its' expected overround.
 
CSF and value.

Went to bellewstown there for the first time last summer. Thought one particular handicap was between the first two in the market so did a reverse forecast on the pair. No bookies shop at the course, so I had to make do with the tote exacta. At the time the bet was placed it was roughly 100/30 the pair, a 5/1 shot that I didnt fancy, a 7/1 shot that could have been the fly in the ointment, and 10s or 12s bar.

Well, the bet won. Delighted. I had the idea of what the CSF would pay from doing the bet often, I had my own shorthand of calculating the divididends. Wasnt sure about teh exacta, could have been more, could have been less. Wasnt certain.

I submit into evidence the results page from the RP.

Bellewstown Exacta - 3/1 shot beats 11/4

Never felt more ripped off in my life.
 
Yep, was looking at that race. It's a tad marginal in that Acombo was pretty smooth first time out and if he's beaten it may well be that Pepporoni Pete is the better horse on the day rather than Acombo running badly, but here goes ...

Bet 1 of 50

3pts Pepporoni Pete/Dusky Warbler
3pts Pepporoni Pete/Triggernometry

Edit: You probably meant opposing Pepporoni Pete, which is probably just as valid, but I'll stick with this way all the same.
 
I was hinting that you leave out Pepporoni on the basis that there is a fair chance that he might bomb-out and do...

Acambo/Dusky
Acambo/Trigger
 
Acombo does tend to run hot and cold though, I'd say there is an equal enough chance of either of them running badly, maybe slightly more so PP - but Acombo running badly is better rewarded.
 
Current fcast prices from Bet365:

Acambo - Dusky Warbler 9.06/1
Acambo - Triggernometry 12.82/1

Pepperoni Pete - Dusky Warbler 20.31/1
Pepperoni Pete - Triggernometry 27.44/1

Might be an interesting comparison come result time.
 
On behalf of Mounty, a summary of Acambo's ideal conditions:

Combine good to soft or faster going with running fresh (first two runs each season or when rested for five weeks or longer thereafter), when not wearing headgear, and his record becomes: 111161 (5-6), improving to: 11111 (5-5) at 2m-2m1f only.

If the chance of PP and Acambo running poorly then I'd agree with you Mel, but I wouldn't say Acambo blows hot and cold for no reason and I'd very much agree with Relkeel's suggestion. Not that it's our trial of course. :D
 
Garney, in my experience that is a typical example of when the exacta seldom or never offers value, i.e. when the two horses you select are at the top of the market. Normally it only gets interesting if you are opposing at least one of the principals in the betting.
 
In that case, why not think about the "crown jewels" combo of Dusky, Russian and Trigger?
Click to expand...

If they were 3 solid 125 performers I'd go with that, but when there credentials are a a last time out non finisher, a horse that hasn't run for two years and a horse whose consistency would not be a strong point I'll leave it go.

The point is that it is one of the races where I feel there is that bit of value in the CSF, although this wouldn't be an extreme case. Often there are many ways to try and take advantage when this sort of race. The bet I have suggested would be the one I would tend to do for throwaway stakes.

The problem (advantage) with doing these bets for throwaway stakes is that, without keeping records, You don't feel you've lost anything when they invariably lose, but you get a nice little bundle when they win. This might give the misleading impression that it is a winning bet.
 
Thanks Grey. Lesson learned. Had I stayed at home, or had there been a bookies on course, I'd have done the CSF, and been a reasonably happy punter. 4.8/1 felt like several kicks in the knackers. 3.8/1 when you take into account the reverse portion of the bet.
 
Originally posted by rorydelargy@Dec 13 2007, 10:36 AM
On behalf of Mounty, a summary of Acambo's ideal conditions:

Combine good to soft or faster going with running fresh (first two runs each season or when rested for five weeks or longer thereafter), when not wearing headgear, and his record becomes: 111161 (5-6), improving to: 11111 (5-5) at 2m-2m1f only.

If the chance of PP and Acambo running poorly then I'd agree with you Mel, but I wouldn't say Acambo blows hot and cold for no reason and I'd very much agree with Relkeel's suggestion. Not that it's our trial of course. :D
Click to expand...
I'm not proud. As I have said, I'm not using this as a tipping platform and either way is just as valid from determining if there is value in the CSF, so I'll bow to peer pressure ...


Bet 1 of 50 now reads

3 pts Acambo - Dusky Warbler
3 pts Acambo - Triggernometry


(and I'm not changing it back)
 
Probably a better race than above.

Bet 2 of 50
7.50 Wolverhampton.

3 pts Arctic Desert to beat Corrib
3 pts Arctic Desert to beat Casablanca Minx

Despite a pull in the weights, Arctic Desert has no plausible chance of beating Confidentiality if Confidentiality runs her race. If Arctic Desert wins it is proof positive that Confidentiality is feeling the effects of having her sixth race in little more than a month. It doesn't mean she'll have bombed out completely, but given she doesn't win, she is no odds on shot to come second as the CSF would have her to be.
 
Agree with Melendez

I know Triggernometry is fancied today and he will love the extra 3f today and would have made a race of it last time but for a bad error. I've laid Pepperoni Pete quite strongly today and I've done a £10 combination forecast of Dusky, Trigger and Acambo.

Will lose on the forecast if Acambo beats one of them two, but not much and I could see Triggernometry giving Acambo a race of it today.
 
Originally posted by chrisbeekracing@Dec 13 2007, 12:35 PM
I've laid Pepperoni Pete quite strongly today and I've done a £10 combination forecast of Dusky, Trigger and Acambo.
Click to expand...
CSF paid £153.50 - nice!
 
Back
Top