How we test and verify what is on this site
This site sells nothing and asks for nothing, so the only thing it has to offer is being right. This page sets out how that is checked, who checks it, and what happens when it turns out to be wrong.
Who is responsible
Betting Tools is owned and run by Katie Davies, trading as Betting Tools from Bournemouth. The contact page carries the full business address and telephone number. There is no editorial team, no pseudonymous byline and no rotating cast of unnamed experts — one person is accountable for everything published here, which is a lower bar than the sector usually clears and an easy one to verify.
The site takes no bets, holds no customer funds and operates no gambling, so it holds no Gambling Commission licence and needs none.
How the calculators are tested
Every bet type is generated from one shared engine rather than coded separately, so there is a single place for a settlement rule to be right or wrong. That engine is checked in three ways.
Against known line counts. A Trixie is 4 bets, a Patent 7, a Yankee 11, a Lucky 15 fifteen, a Canadian 26, a Heinz 57, a Super Heinz 120 and a Goliath 247. These are not opinions — they follow from the combinatorics, and the engine derives them rather than storing them, so a wrong number would be a wrong formula.
Against hand-computed settlements. A £1 Lucky 15 on 5/2, 2/1, 6/4 and evens with all four winning returns £188.00: eleven pounds of singles, £44.75 of doubles, £79.75 of trebles and a £52.50 fourfold. Anyone can check that with a pen. The awkward cases are checked the same way — void legs reducing a fourfold to a treble, Rule 4 taking pence in the pound off winnings only, dead heats dividing the stake rather than halving the odds.
In a real browser. The calculators are driven automatically at a phone viewport before release, typing prices in and reading the rendered result, because logic that is correct in isolation can still be wired to the wrong input.
How operator information is verified
Every feature marked as confirmed in the comparison table was read from that operator's own public pages, from a UK connection, on the date printed at the top of the table — currently 11 August. Nothing is taken from another comparison site.
Where a check could not be completed the table says not checked rather than showing a cross. Several large operators run heavily scripted sites that do not expose their help content to an automated read, and converting that failure into a claim that a feature is missing would be a fabrication in the opposite direction. The consequence is a table with visible gaps that understates several operators — which is the intended trade, because a gap you can see is more useful than a tick you cannot trust.
Welcome offers carry the date they were read because they are the most volatile information in the sector. The operator's own current terms are what govern your bet, always.
What this site will not do
No tips, no predictions and no selections. No paid placement in the comparison table, no sponsored posts and no guest articles. No invented star ratings, and no expert personas that do not exist.
Where a link to an operator is commercial it is marked as such in the page markup. If a commercial arrangement is ever put in place it will be disclosed on the page it affects rather than in a policy nobody reads.
Questions about our method
How do you know the calculators are correct?
Every bet type is checked against its known line count — Trixie 4, Patent 7, Yankee 11, Lucky 15, Canadian 26, Heinz 57, Super Heinz 120, Goliath 247 — and against settlements computed independently by hand. A Lucky 15 on 5/2, 2/1, 6/4 and evens returns £188.00 from a £15 stake, and that figure is reproducible with a pen and paper.
Why are the worked examples generated rather than written?
Because hand-typed arithmetic accumulates errors, and on a site whose only product is correct maths a guide that contradicts its own calculator is worse than no guide. Every worked example, structure table and chart is produced by the same code that runs the tool.
How is operator information verified?
By loading each operator’s own public pages and reading the feature and offer claims from them directly, on the date printed at the top of the comparison table. Nothing is copied from other comparison sites and nothing is filled in from memory.
Why does the comparison table have gaps?
Because a failed check is not evidence that a feature is missing. Several operators run heavily scripted sites that did not expose their help content. Recording those as unavailable would be a claim we cannot support, so they say not checked instead.
Do you accept payment for placement or ratings?
No. There is no paid placement in the comparison table, no sponsored content and no guest posting. Where an outbound link is commercial it is marked as such in the markup, and any commercial arrangement would be disclosed on the page it affects.
What do you do when something turns out to be wrong?
Fix it and say so. Settlement conventions vary between firms, so a discrepancy is not always an error here — but a genuine bug gets corrected rather than argued with, and the correction is more useful than the original claim.