Chief - all TAB dividends are exressed as a dividend PER UNIT wagered. In this case there was a single winner who only wagered half a unit - therefore the dividend is shown as twice what he actually won. Whenever a large Trifecta div is shown you always need to check the pool size to see if the div was really that big or if it has been doubled by only having a half unit winner.

You learn something every day.
You can tell I hardly ever bet trifectas.
Can't stand the long run of outs.

So if the person had bet 1 unit or 10 units, because of the pool size and the fact he was the only winner, he would have still only received $46,000 in total??

So if one is punting very rough trifectas, only have half units, cause you win the same amount regardless of units bet, as long as you are the only winner.

However, if two people had won that trifecta - one had a half unit and one a full unit - first person gets 1/3 of $46,000 and the other gets 2/3 of $46,000??

Chief - yes all your analysis there is right - definitely only bet 1/2 unit if betting on rough trifectas.

PS. Does anyone know the rules for the various TAB's if NOBODY has the selected combination? I believe that Supertab pays out on the selected horses in any order (ie. if it was 15-13-11 past post but nobody had this in trifecta they will pay on 11-13-15, 13-11-15, etc)? I could not find any reference on any of the TABs websites to the actual rule in this case.

You're right Chief. You can't win one cent more than what's in the total pool for that race. If the person who landed the trifecta on this race had put, say $5 (10 units) on that combination, the trifecta would have only paid $9,200. Yet if he was the only winner, he would have still collected $46,000.

In fact, from memory, the NSW and QLD TAB trifecta divvies on the same race paid $15,000 and $13,000 respectively. I'm not sure what the pools were in those states but there were obviously more winning tickets.

The one thing that never changes is the commission that goes to the TAB.

The retention of the fifty cent bet allows the TAB to:

1. Round down more severely than necessary to the detriment of all its punters, but particularly those whose bets are usually in the shorter price bracket;

2. Declare dividends which are sometimes theoretical, ie no such dividend was actually paid or received (as is the case with a single live ticket at 50c);

3. Provide a betting medium that is now inferior to a growing number of non-tote off-course alternatives;

4. Pretend that the value of 50 cents has remained constant over 35 years or more;

5. Forget about the TAB punter as a service consumer. The TAB is serving its own interest first;

6. Disregard the changing demographic of their clientele;

7. Increase their take of every pool beyond the acknowledged percentage;

8. ummm ...... can't think of any more but I'm sure someone else can. :smile:

__________________
EVERYONE'S A WINNER!!!

With flexi betting in NSW, what happens if the only successful bet on the Tri is a 1% flexi bet? If the pool payable on the race is $50000 would the dividend be declared as $5 million?
Imagine the TAB puppets at Sky carrying on about that one.

Exactly Tulloch. I don't know why everyone is so surprised at the results.

It was a wet track in Melbourne in Winter.

The rail was well out (one of the biggest hazards for punters).

The quality of runners was average to poor.

It was mid week.

I took one look at the form and track conditions for ALL of Wednesday's racing then went to the movies.

I'll bet at Sandown, but only when the conditions suit me.

Well said Privater.
Couldn't agree more - plus Melb is full of dodgy people!! LOL

:lol:

not me I hope!