UK Computaform

As there is no local racing today this is an opportunity to make an appeal to Tab-online.
If you wish to promote betting on UK racing,and truly support "responsible gambling",the info that you publish for your customers use needs to be accurate.
Unfortunately the UK computaform is nonsense.
It is important to form to know what surface a horse ran on,and it used to be shown as T (turf) P (polytrack) F (fibresand) etc Now all runs a shown as W..which I presume stands for "whatever".
There is a block marked HR which I assume is the horse rating (Same block in SA is merit rating) Are these rating for the surface being raced on? I bet nobody knows!They do not match the official BHA ratings.
There are up to 30 or 40 info errors in any UK computaform.

Disclaimers are designed for the odd error that creeps in,not for a complete disregard of the efficacy of the info provided.

The problem is that it merely another indication of the management who have a complete disregard for its customer and are not even embarrassed to deliberately mislead them....sad but true!

How much does Computaform cost rob?

Did you ever take a look at this? www.africanbettingclan.com/forum/phorum-...15/read.php?6,116671

It is free ,just like roadsigns......but just like roadsigns ,if you put it out there,make it accurate!

correct..

I just use a mixture of ATR,racingpost and timeform but tbh UK racing at this time of year does not appeal to me..

Hibs,I seldom get involved but it incenses me that the info is intended to entice more punters to participate,and then they put out misleading rubbish.
When I do race (will probably take a PA at lingfield...inspite of no "tickets going forward" info) and I use Racing post together with the speed ratings on the AT THE RACES website...but play for an interest only and very small!

The UK Computaform has been riddled with mistakes for months.

I've made these points before but a couple of bones of contentions are that a) every race in a horse's past form is indicated as having been a handicap, b) the ratings are entirely unreliable (they had ace sprinter Kingsgate Native rated something ridiculous like 29 in one of his races last year) and c) the course, distance, and course-and-distance stats for many horses make no sense. A horse that has never won at this course cannot possibly have won over this C&D, mmm? Yet I've seen anomalies like that many times.

As usual, one is left with the conclusion that either nobody notices these things, or nobody gives a rat's ass. I'm not sure which is worse.

The other "30-40 errors" I talk about include those very issues that Magic mentions.
Eg. horse no 1 in race no 1 at Lingfield today......in respect of runs coursedist shows as 0-2-5.....cast your eyes up and there are 2 wins coursedist in the last 4 runs?????
The info on almost every horse is misleading to some extent and I can vouch for the fact that upper management couldn't give a rat's ass because I have brought this to their attention before without an ounce of subsequent action.

Hello all , i usually just pop in to read the threads but couldn't resist contributing to this thread , i complained about this a while back to "MK" and he said that the problems occur from the people who send the data to them. He asked me to make a list and site actual errors, which i did .The only thing that was ever sorted out was the description of the track surface on the top right of the uk computaform. Everything else remains a cock up , the ratings , the distances of various tracks being incorrect , horses beating themselves etc etc

these guys dont give a shyt about furnishing the punter with the correct info , the result , well theyve lost me as a contributor to their Uk pools !