Typically associated with horse and greyhound racing, the Computer Straight Forecast (CSF) and the Exacta are fundamentally similar, insofar as they are bets that involve predicting the first- and second-place finishers in an event in the correct order. However, the main difference between them is the way in which winning returns are calculated, which is worthy of further explanation.
Of course, some bookmakers, on the High Street and online, offer fixed odds for straight forecasts before the start of a horse or greyhound race. Those that don’t rely on CSF dividends, which are declared, to a £1 stake, after the race has finished. The CSF dividend is based on the number of starters and the starting prices of the horses involved in the finish; it stands to reason that if, say, two outsiders finish first and second in a ‘cavalry charge’ handicap, such as the Royal Hunt Cup or the Stewards’ Cup, the dividend will be vastly higher than if, say, the market leaders fill the first two places in a single-figure field.
In Britain, the Exacta is effectively the Tote equivalent of the CSF but, by contrast to the latter, is a pool bet, as are all Tote bets. As such, Exacta dividends are calculated by dividing the total amount of money bet into the Exacta pool – subject to a 25% deduction for races governed by the British Horseracing Authority (BHA) – by the number of winning tickets. Like the CSF, the Exacta can be reversed, or permed, to include three, four or more selections, to increase the chances of winning; the Reverse Exacta costs double the stake of the simple Straight Exacta, while the Combined Exacta costs proportionately more, because of the number of permutations involved. Naturally enough, the Exacta, like the CSF, is typically only available on fields of three or more runners, unless otherwise stated.